[Wikipedia-l] A parallel World Wide Web?

Wed Jun 2 20:18:29 UTC 2004

> And actually he is perfectly right: That *is* our biggest problem. Not the 
> copying, not errors, not the missing editors, not the enthusiasts he 
> mentions. But the "superfluous trivia". Our problem is noise, in en: even 
> more as in de:.  The noise repells qualified authors and editors. This is the 
> reason why the article quality does not increase the way that should be 
> expected given the idea behind wikipedia and the popularity and it already 
> has.
> 
> As an encyclopaedia, we should reduce noise. Instead we are creating noise by 
> accepting articles on any subject. For me - opposing that 
> noise-accepting-policy since one and a half years now - that outsiders 
> statement is very interesting.

Can you give a definition of "noise" vs. "non-noise" topics that does not
ultimately boil down to arbitrarily including some while excluding others?

-- 
10:16PM  up 120 days,  7:31, 1 user, load averages: 0.22, 0.31, 0.25

Every non-empty totally disconnected perfect compact metric space is
homeomorphic to the Cantor set.