 When scholarship meets Wikipedia - Los Angeles Times (blog) |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
  |
| Newsfeed |
 Fri 15th January 2010, 6:27pm
Post
#1
|
|
Postmaster General  Group: Bots Posts: 3,272 Joined: Mon 3rd Sep 2007, 9:29pm Member No.: 2,885  |
<img alt="" height="1" width="1" />When scholarship meets [b]Wikipedia[/b] Los Angeles Times (blog) Maybe you have to be something of a fan of early jazz to know coronetist Bix Beiderbecke -- he's in the picture above, horn pointed at the camera. ... View the article |
   |
 
|
| John Limey |
Fri 15th January 2010, 7:45pm
Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member Group: Regulars Posts: 387 Joined: Wed 8th Jul 2009, 3:04pm Member No.: 12,473 |
QUOTE(Newsfeed @ Fri 15th January 2010, 6:27pm)  <img alt="" height="1" width="1" />When scholarship meets [b]Wikipedia[/b] Los Angeles Times (blog) Maybe you have to be something of a fan of early jazz to know coronetist Bix Beiderbecke -- he's in the picture above, horn pointed at the camera. ... <a href="http://news.google.com/news/more?pz=1&ned=us&ncl=dg2gQfsCIq-T4-M" target="_blank"></a> View the article An interesting and all too typical story. I particularly enjoyed: QUOTE No wonder he was angry. The editor's comments are riddled with grammatical errors ("does this implies", "alcoholic mistaken") and misspellings ("irrevelant", "consise"). While this is, admittedly, a behind-the-scenes discussion, the editor's critique is so sloppily written that it verges on the indecipherable. I've long believed that Wikipedia can't succeed until it involves experts more in its processes, but this, of course, is why that's so difficult to accomplish. Good old Randy from Boise hates experts. |
|
|
|
| Trick cyclist |
Fri 15th January 2010, 11:01pm
Post
#3
|
 Fortunately Denmark palmed Norway off to Sweden in 1814 Group: Inactive Posts: 321 Joined: Sat 28th Nov 2009, 1:46am Member No.: 15,636 |
QUOTE(Limey @ Fri 15th January 2010, 7:45pm) An interesting and all too typical story. Read to the end of the article. Yes at first he dealt with a reviewer who was incompetent and could barely speak English. Yet this reviewer was replaced with another one, and the article duly received GA status even if after too long a delay. It would be easy to say that this proves that Wikipedia gets things right eventually. |
|
|
|
| John Limey |
Fri 15th January 2010, 11:12pm
Post
#4
|
|
Senior Member Group: Regulars Posts: 387 Joined: Wed 8th Jul 2009, 3:04pm Member No.: 12,473 |
QUOTE(Trick cyclist @ Fri 15th January 2010, 11:01pm) QUOTE(Limey @ Fri 15th January 2010, 7:45pm) An interesting and all too typical story. Read to the end of the article. Yes at first he dealt with a reviewer who was incompetent and could barely speak English. Yet this reviewer was replaced with another one, and the article duly received GA status even if after too long a delay. It would be easy to say that this proves that Wikipedia gets things right eventually. The point, of course, is that eventually isn't good enough. Sure, that article got GA. You'll notice that the author is gone now. So, sure the article got GA status, but the expert was scared off (to the point that he felt like talking to a reporter about it) and as the article says if you read to the end, "Equally likely, sadly, is that it will scare other scholars off from investing their time in creating well-rounded Wikipedia entries." |
|
|
|
| carbuncle |
Fri 15th January 2010, 11:42pm
Post
#5
|
 Fat Cat Group: Regulars Posts: 1,601 Joined: Sun 30th Mar 2008, 4:48pm Member No.: 5,544 |
QUOTE(Trick cyclist @ Fri 15th January 2010, 11:01pm) QUOTE(Limey @ Fri 15th January 2010, 7:45pm) An interesting and all too typical story. Read to the end of the article. Yes at first he dealt with a reviewer who was incompetent and could barely speak English. Yet this reviewer was replaced with another one, and the article duly received GA status even if after too long a delay. It would be easy to say that this proves that Wikipedia gets things right eventually. The "incompetent" reviewer was [[User:Philcha]]. Judging from their contributions to that review, it is difficult to tell how they managed to create such articles as [[Memory confusion protocol]], which is quite readable, even if it omits a crucial detail. |
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 23rd 5 13, 7:39pm |