Comments on: Wikipedia and the Administrator problem http://www.limbicnutrition.com/blog/wikipedia-and-the-administrator-problem/ Food for the pleasure center of the brain Sun, 04 Jul 2010 08:07:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc By: Michael Meadon http://www.limbicnutrition.com/blog/wikipedia-and-the-administrator-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-23332 Michael Meadon Thu, 25 Dec 2008 13:25:09 +0000 http://www.limbicnutrition.com/blog/wikipedia-and-the-administrator-problem/#comment-23332 Yeah... I think it's pretty clear that Wikipedia works really well. When I first heard of it (via, of all things, an <i>Economist</i> article sometime in 2005), I was extremely skeptical and hen my students started citing it, I admonished them. But then I figured I should go see what the fuss was all about... how pleasantly surprised I was. IMHO, Wikipedia is by far the best (general) encyclopedia in history... Anyway. Did you get my email? The South African science / rational blogosphere will be organized soon if I have anything to do with it... :-) Yeah… I think it’s pretty clear that Wikipedia works really well. When I first heard of it (via, of all things, an Economist article sometime in 2005), I was extremely skeptical and hen my students started citing it, I admonished them. But then I figured I should go see what the fuss was all about… how pleasantly surprised I was. IMHO, Wikipedia is by far the best (general) encyclopedia in history…

Anyway. Did you get my email? The South African science / rational blogosphere will be organized soon if I have anything to do with it… :-)

]]> By: limbic http://www.limbicnutrition.com/blog/wikipedia-and-the-administrator-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-23330 limbic Thu, 25 Dec 2008 09:58:02 +0000 http://www.limbicnutrition.com/blog/wikipedia-and-the-administrator-problem/#comment-23330 I think he is being a bit polemical, and perhaps even a bit unfair. Wikipedia appears to work extremely well. It is a system that has arisen from trial and error (Nassim Nicholas Taleb's "<a href="http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article4022091.ece?print=yes" rel="nofollow">Tinkering</a>" even) and the real point may be that applying political ideas like "democracy" to systems like Wikipedia may be both damaging and pointless. On a side note, I find that NPOV is a superbly useful tool in my own writing, as is CITE. NPOV even made it into the book "Mind Performace Hacks". I strongly suspect that many of Wikipedia's criticvs are not aware of the rules or the process by which content is forged and mediated. Thanks for taking the time to comment. I hope you see fit to come back and visit again. I think he is being a bit polemical, and perhaps even a bit unfair. Wikipedia appears to work extremely well. It is a system that has arisen from trial and error (Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s “Tinkering” even) and the real point may be that applying political ideas like “democracy” to systems like Wikipedia may be both damaging and pointless.

On a side note, I find that NPOV is a superbly useful tool in my own writing, as is CITE. NPOV even made it into the book “Mind Performace Hacks”. I strongly suspect that many of Wikipedia’s criticvs are not aware of the rules or the process by which content is forged and mediated.

Thanks for taking the time to comment. I hope you see fit to come back and visit again.

]]> By: Michael Meadon http://www.limbicnutrition.com/blog/wikipedia-and-the-administrator-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-23328 Michael Meadon Thu, 25 Dec 2008 07:17:15 +0000 http://www.limbicnutrition.com/blog/wikipedia-and-the-administrator-problem/#comment-23328 I'm not so sure we'd <i>want</i> Wikipedia to be democratic in the sense that article content gets decided my majority voting. So perhaps it's not really a bad thing that Wikipedia is not democratic. What it is, though, is meritocratic - the barriers to entry are zero (discounting time and the cost of internet access) and people have to earn their Wiki-reputations. People with reputations in the meatspace often find this disconcerting or troubling, but it is, I suspect, a good thing. The person you refer to may know a lot about his subject, but does he understand (and adhere to) the policies - WP:NPOV, WP:CITE, etc. - without which Wikipedia couldn't function? I’m not so sure we’d want Wikipedia to be democratic in the sense that article content gets decided my majority voting. So perhaps it’s not really a bad thing that Wikipedia is not democratic. What it is, though, is meritocratic – the barriers to entry are zero (discounting time and the cost of internet access) and people have to earn their Wiki-reputations. People with reputations in the meatspace often find this disconcerting or troubling, but it is, I suspect, a good thing. The person you refer to may know a lot about his subject, but does he understand (and adhere to) the policies – WP:NPOV, WP:CITE, etc. – without which Wikipedia couldn’t function?

]]>