QUOTE(Newsfeed @ Sun 7th August 2011, 4:01pm)
Wikipedia seeks women to balance its 'geeky' editorsThe IndependentWikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has launched a recruitment drive for women because its team of "26-year-old geeky, male" contributors lack the expertise to edit some of its pages. While the internet encyclopedia is "very strong" in some areas, such as science and technology, he said, its coverage of other issues was suffering because of a lack of diversity within its community of editors. "The main thing is to bring in people of all different backgrounds. If you do that, you increase the knowledge base of the site, which can only be a good thing. At the moment, we are relatively poor in a few areas; for example, biographies of famous women through history and issues surrounding early childcare."
and more »View the article Okay, Jimbo's lips are moving, so it's time to check. Check article on
teething. Article with 123 references on
breastfeeding with pictures. (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/happy.gif) Cute.
Uh oh, trouble in paradise. Long article with 123 references on
baby colic BUT also a tag:
"This article's tone or style may not reflect the formal tone used on Wikipedia. " (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/blink.gif)
On the TALK page:
QUOTE(WP TALK for Baby Colic)
== Unencyclopedic Language ==
"Tooting"? "Pooping"? What cutesy site for mothers was this text cut'n'pasted from? [[Special:Contributions/218.191.194.125|218.191.194.125]] ([[User talk:218.191.194.125|talk]]) 15:39, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
I also found the abbreviation "BM" rather twee. Does this mean bowel movement? It's all rather cryptic! [[User:Ioliver|Ian]] ([[User talk:Ioliver|talk]]) 18:25, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
== Tone ==
"...your baby..." and "All of us...."
Please change this section to use neutral, encyclopedic tone, not the tone of literature directed to calm parents, useful as that may be in another context. --IP
(IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)
What happens when the widdle new mudders with the widdle tooters and poopers attempt to edit Der Mighty Wiki? (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/ermm.gif)
NEUTRAL TONE. And if you can't stay neutral, and least don't be infantile about infants. (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)
More to the point, I'm curious if Jimbo went through this 40 kB article and decided that it wasn't up to WP standards, or something. Or, perhaps he just DECIDED that if he looked at the childcare articles (not that he really did), he wouldn't find them up to WP standards.
Okay, how did he arrive at this conclusion that WP is relatively poor on issues surrounding early childcare?? Did the new mother of Jimbo's new baby try to find info on child care on WP? What topic was it that she complained about? Perhaps Jimbo himself had to resort to WP, in the middle of the night, with a screaming infant? And what about
WP:NOTMANUAL? What is it that Jimbo would like to see here?
Here's the thing: there's nothing to back up his assertion. There's an article with 56 references on baby
diapers. There's an 8-reference article on
diaper bags. And a 26 ref article on
pacifiers (includes a section on adult pacifiers, WTF). The article on
infant has a "see also" section on infant care which links WP articles on:
*
Bassinet (infant bed)
*
Bathing*
Cradle cap*
Day care*
Diaper rash*
Infant formula*
Infant massage*
Immunization*
Paternal bond*
Umbilical cordAs well as the ones already mentioned. The one on diaper bags has tips about
organizing a diaper bag. With article links.
You tend to make broad, generalized statements in your talks, Jimbo. And they
sound believable. But Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth. You fail to provide verifiable citations from reliable sources for what you say. Good thing you don't edit much. (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif)