[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia more popular than Britannica!

Sat Aug 2 12:10:51 UTC 2003

james duffy wrote in part:

>I think wiki does need as it develops to be able to have some 'final'
>articles that, having reached a clear standard of accuracy, readability etc
>can be removed from the editing process. The downside of constant editing
>is that some articles that reach a high standard then can lose that as
>those who produced the standard leave and someone comes on and rewrites it
>to a lower standard.

I don't think that an article sould ever be /removed/ from editing,
especially when we don't know what light the future may shed on it.
Even EB doesn't stop editing their articles for the next edition.
Rather, they /capture/ an article when it's good and publish that.

This is what the Sifter project is supposed to do.
I doubt that the time will /ever/ come that people say
«Look it up on Wikipedia -- that's a reliable source.».
Rather, they'll say «Look it up on /Sifterpedia/.».
Nobody's really working on the Sifter project right now --
but that can change at any time.

-- Toby