[WikiEN-l] Approval marking (was: Why Academics are Useful to Wikipedia)

Wed Sep 15 18:50:00 UTC 2004

Poor, Edmund W wrote:

>For more than 90% of articles, there have been no reversion wars. The
>latest version is accurate, uncontroversial and fairly well
>spell-checked & copy-edited.
>
>Of the remaining 10% of articles, there are some subjects which would
>benefit from some sort of approval marking system. Still, I hope for
>these that we will include the 'development version' along with any
>'approved' versions in Wikipedia 1.0 print or DVD publications.
>
>For that fraction of 1% which are highly controversial, approval marking
>is not really an issue. No academic or cleric has sufficient authority
>to settle the hottest disputes of our times. 
>
>So let's concentrate on putting into effect a system which will boost
>consumer acceptance of 90% to 99% of our articles. Librarians aren't
>warning students against our global warming or Invasion of Iraq articles
>-- or at least we don't care much if they do. But it would be nice if
>our math and physics articles, as well as our non-controversial history
>and biology articles, could get some respect.
>
This is all very sensible.  The 1% that you speak of attract a lot of 
activity which generates far more heat than light.

There is no need to be compulsive about including everything in a first 
edition if we are confident that there will be further editions.  The 
knowledge that there will be further editions should guide us in 
ruthlessly trimming the contents of the first to what will put our best 
foot forward, and which gives a promise of more and better things to come.

Ec