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@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@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l