--- In rara-avis-l@yahoogroups.com, "Gonzalo Baeza" <gbaeza@...> wrote:
>
> I remember how in the last newspaper I worked for the editors sent
> out a memo warning every reporter not to use Wikipedia unless they
> could corroborate its information with other sources.
> Wikipedia is good in that it fills a void that's not covered by
> conventional encyclopedias, especially when it comes to pop culture.
> Nonetheless, you have to to use it with caution. The way it
> operates, it's too vulnerable to deliberate misinformation.
>
It depends on the topic. If those who don't know much (or anything)
correct those that do in order to manipulate the facts, then it
becomes a stupid battle. The method discourages people with great
knowledge from contributing. The quality, therefore, is highly variable.
I think Wikipedia is especially good when the material is obscure or
specialized and a guy or a few guys who are knowledgeable writes up
the page. Knowledge is not democratically distributed, alas.
Best,
mrt
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 11 Dec 2008 EST