[Wikipedia-l] A Solution to Larry Sanger's Criticisms - Project Has Been Around For A While

Tue Jan 4 12:34:33 UTC 2005

No way, an anonymous editor can cite references as well as anyone else and
it is not his bona fides that makes the reference good but the reputation
and authoritativeness of the reference. Anyone who has attended institutions
of higher learning is fully aware that formal qualifications mean next to
nothing and has probably learned that those who cite their degrees and
position as authority in the course of an argument rather than focusing on
evidence which might support their position do so because they are unable to
prevail using the evidence available to them.

Fred

> From: NSK <nsk2 at wikinerds.org>
> Organization: Wikinerds
> Reply-To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 13:50:05 +0200
> To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] A Solution to Larry Sanger's Criticisms - Project
> Has Been Around For A While
> 
> On Tuesday 04 January 2005 06:40, Shaun MacPherson wrote:
>> I think the easiest way to make Wikipedia more
>> credible is with a Fact and Reference Project
> 
> It sounds like a good idea.
> 
> But it's not enough: You should also limit somehow the anon contributions and
> employ maintainers for each article (this is what I do on most of my
> projects). The names (full names) of the authors and maintainers must be
> visible in the article, together with 1 or 2-line short bios demonstrating
> their expertise (degrees or work experience), as well as a References section
> (which should be long - very long).
> 
> See my policy here:
> 
> http://nerdypc.wikinerds.org/index.php/Help:Editing_process
> 
> -- 
> NSK
> The Wikinerds Community Federation of Science Wikis
> Owner of the Wikinerds Portal http://portal.wikinerds.org
> Owner of the NerdyPC IT Wiki http://www.nerdypc.org
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l