[Wikipedia-l] Advertising for expert volunteers

Sun Oct 12 10:44:38 UTC 2003

Thomas R. Koll wrote:

>On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 03:13:18PM +0800, Andrew Lih wrote:
>  
>
>>Perhaps I'm completely cynical, but the variety of suggestions about
>>hiring experts to keep watch, or college professors, or
>>"known-neutral-and-knowledgeable" folks is a bit troubling and un-Wiki.
>>(And for those who know what I do for a living will find it ironic. :) 
>>
>>If this route is considered, we should ensure no greater authority will
>>be conferred upon this class of contributors.  So far, the suggestions
>>by Delerium and Mav have been innocent enough, but could be dangerous if
>>it becomes related to ownership, entitlement or keeper-status of certain
>>topics.  
>>    
>>
>
>How about advertising in scientific magazines? But before we do that we
>should make a survey what jobs and interests our readers have so we can
>focus one advertising in a Wild-West-magazine somthing like
>"Billy the Kid wanted! Write and article about him in the WP"
>Ads should be 1) cheaper than experts and 2) reach more people.
>
>
>  
>
Advertising for expert volunteers in places where they might hang out 
seems like a much better use of limited funds than paying for experts -- 
I think we have not even begun to tap the true range of potential expert 
volunteers out there who are willing to contribute for the love of it.

Places to advertise:
* scientific journals (Nature ...)
* medical journals (NEJM, JAMA, The Lancet)
* popular science magazines (New Scientist, Scientific American)
* engineering journals (IEEE Spectrum ...)
* specialist games magazines, music magazines ...
* etc.

-- Neil