[Wikipedia-l] Re: in response to your article "Librarian: Don't use Wikipedia as source" in the Post-Standard

[phil hunt]

On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 12:59:59 +0800, Andrew Lih <andrew.lih at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Rather than take me up on the experiment, or suggest an alternative,
>he complained simply that the whole idea of Wikipedia was
>"outrageous," "repugnant" and finally (in another email) "dangerous,"
>and therefore he refused to take part in my experiment.

Some people evidently find the whole idea of Wikipedia deeply 
unsettling, presuambly because it overturns their deeply-held 
convictions. 

Others believe that anything they can get without payment just can't
be any good (these people aren't as bad as the first lot, and can
usually be persuaded by evidence).

Meanwhile, Wikipedia continues to grow, doubling every 9 months or 
so, gets more and more readers, and is approaching a million 
articles.

By the time we approach 10 million articles (some time in 2007?) I 
expect the majority of the nay-sayers will have learned better.

-- 
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than 
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: zen19725 at zen dot co dot uk)