QUOTE(Guido den Broeder @ Tue 30th June 2009, 9:56pm)
Thanks for the multiple insults, but you're looking at en:Wikisage which is still in its testing phase.
nl:Wikisage is slightly larger.
That's true. And even more importantly it has the Jimboesque need for self-promotion:
http://nl.wikisage.org/wiki/Guido_den_BroederAt least it explains why there are so many articles in the English site about the same malaise.
By the way, I was diagnosed as having ME in the mid 1980s when it was barely described in the literature. It turned out to be a sleep center disorder induced by a viral infection.
It doesn't make me an expert on ME either.
QUOTE(dtobias @ Tue 30th June 2009, 5:55am)
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Mon 29th June 2009, 3:47pm)
are you willing to let people die as a result of Wikipedia information?
That's probably a genie that will never be placed back into its bottle; even if Wikipedia itself were to be successfully bottled, the Internet as a whole wouldn't be. Freedom occasionally kills, and censorship occasionally saves lives, but that doesn't mean I'm supportive of a regime of centralized control of information (somehow trusting this control to always remain in "good hands") that would be needed to prevent "bad" information from getting out and possibly killing people.
That's true. The Internet is a gold mine of misinformation, lies and the ramblings of mentally disturbed people. I don't advocate shutting down Wikipedia as it would be like the magician's apprentice trying to stop the broom by cutting it into pieces with an axe - we know how that ended.
The way to beat Wikipedia is to produce a better encyclopedia that is free to use and quote, but not free to edit. And wikis are not the way to produce authoritative encyclopedias.
Has anyone found open source software that produces Wikipedia-like formatted result while using traditional editorial control and approval? I know that EB uses their own in-house software (which must be a study in itself). Is there something similar out there?