[Web4lib] The Wikipedia Gotcha -- a cosmic perspective

[Marion Sumerianlibrarian]

why not simply allow contributors to create headings,
and then submit their thoughts willy-nilly (or
wili-wiki), as they see fit? 

organization, howsoever it is defined, will come
later, as the issues become more apparent.

thanks for your response, and for carrying the
discussion forward.

ms

--- "Binkley, Peter" <Peter.Binkley at ualberta.ca>
wrote:

> Within a wiki (in the librarians group at wikipedia
> or pbwiki or
> wherever), perhaps a format modelled on Talk Origins
> (http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html) would
> work: an index of
> claims (statements about wikipedia from librarians),
> each with its own
> page where the claim is articulated and sourced, and
> then responses are
> enumerated and sourced. The sources could be links
> to archived email
> messages or threads that capture a particular
> argument well. Links into
> Wikipedia's documentation would also be useful. 
> 
> The difference would be that Talk Origins represents
> the efforts of one
> community to debunk the claims of another, whereas
> the Wikipedia wiki
> would represent a discussion within a single
> community which has not
> reached consensus. It would be possible to set up
> our site as a list of
> pro-Wikipedia claims with anti-Wikipedia responses
> or vice versa (and
> appear to favour one side over the other), or allow
> both with lots of
> interlinking of responses (and deal with a lot of
> redundancy).
> 
> Of course, someone is going to have to do the
> work...
> 
> Peter



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a PS3 game guru.
Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at Yahoo! Games.
http://videogames.yahoo.com/platform?platform=120121