QUOTE(JoseClutch @ Tue 4th September 2007, 10:22am)
QUOTE(Pwok @ Sun 2nd September 2007, 12:39pm)
QUOTE(Firsfron of Ronchester @ Sat 1st September 2007, 5:04pm)
The title may be a whitewash, but (groan) at least the article is an acknowledgement that something unprofessional did happen, unlike the quickly deleted subpages.
"Unprofessional?" Isn't the whole point of Wikipedia to be unprofessional? To be a professional, you need the following:
- Advanced training and/or education
- An ethics code separate from that of the enterprise you associate with
- Substantial discretion over your job
None of these are present at Wikipedia. To expect "professionalism" from them is to misunderstand what a professional is.
I'm not sure this is a good description of professionalism, and the only point of these that Wikipedians *might* not meet is the first one. All of them apply their own ethic code, and as an undirected volunteer you have substantial discretion over your job. Editors aren't forced to make any edits, and admins aren't forced to take any actions. We all have discretion. We all have our own ethics code, although there are some rules, I've never had a job without rules. And while many Wikipedians have little or no formal training, there are lots of Wikipedias with extensive formal training. Check out the math articles, it's rife with genuine Ph.D.s (which is evident just from the writing), and being mostly "nerds", many have at leave reasonable training (bachelors or what have you).
We're not professional because we don't get paid. I meet all three of those points, (more or less - I'm in the middle of a Ph.D. so how "advanced" my education is can be debated — I have a four year honours degree in science, you may not consider that "advanced"), but I'm not a professional, I edit Wikipedia as a hobby.
In ordinary usage, being a professional means you get paid, as in professional hitman. Sorry, gals, hitmen as a rule are a hidebound traditional sexist bunch — and there's a thick, even •proof glass ceiling among hit professors, and even though we all know there are many fine hitmisses, hitnymphs, and hitwomen, somehow those more PC termsofart just ain't made the hit parade yet, with or without a •.
Where was I ??? Oh yeah, professionalism …
The question is whether Wikipediots observe Norms Of Research Methodology
) that are analogous to those observed in the relevant
Now that is such a good question that I think it's worth starting another thread devoted to discussing it — give me a second, as thinking up new titles is always something of a strain for me.
Jonny This post has been edited by Jonny Cache: Tue 4th September 2007, 3:38pm