I really don't think "we" all in agreement on what "we" want.
I do not have a problem with people using Wikipedia as a primary
source for information. When it comes to certain topics, I would
encourage it because I have confidence in our accuracy and wide
coverage.
However, I would not encourage people to stake their fortune or their
health on Wikipedia at all, and there are certain topics that I would
discourage people from using Wikipedia as a primary source or in some
cases even a secondary source for (pretty much anything related to
Eastern Europe, all of which is still definitely a Work In Progress
when it comes to POV).
Mark
On 06/03/07, Stan Shebs <stanshebs(a)earthlink.net> wrote:
As students begin their online research, they
could view the
prevalence of Wikipedia references in Google as proof of the accuracy
and reliability of the source. Given the search exposure and sheer
volume of data available on the site, they might fall into the trap of
relying on a single source for their education.
What we *really* want is for
people to pass through WP on the way to our
sources and references and external links, and use those for citations
instead of WP. I think we say that somewhere, but what else can we do to
drive home the point? I've added some really topnotch books as
references for articles, and yet when I go back to the library, those
books are still sitting on the shelves, when they should be checked out
nonstop.
Stan
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
--
Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.