avoiding forks (was Re: [Wikipedia-l] public service ads in Wikipedia?)

[Michael Snow]

David Gerard wrote:

>I'm really
>not convinced that signing articles is an in-demand idea, let alone a good one.
>  
>
Don't worry, if anybody tries to push it you can always threaten to lift 
the ban on Gzornenplatz (uh, I mean Wik), who spent some time following 
[[User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )]] around removing all of his 
signatures that he put in non-displaying comments.

I agree that there's not much call for signing articles on a 
collaborative project when a detailed history function is available. 
Wikipedia is not a vanity press. The only thing that could justify it is 
when it's a way of taking responsibility for the content (as opposed to 
credit). For example, that's why I've adopted a practice of having 
signed articles on The Wikipedia Signpost, since it's effectively 
original reporting. But for encyclopedia articles, having an author take 
responsibility would be a pathetic stand-in for what we really need, 
which is more and better references so that information can properly be 
traced to its source. Plus we have a well-warranted policy against 
allowing original research in the encyclopedia.

--Michael Snow