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

Wed Jan 5 18:34:34 UTC 2005

Shaun MacPherson wrote:

> --- NSK <nsk2 at wikinerds.org> wrote: 
>  
>
>>On Tuesday 04 January 2005 17:55, Traroth wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Does your proposition mean that only experts will be
>>>      
>>>
>>>authorized to contribute ? That's a major change in
>>>      
>>>
>>>the Wikipedia spirit, and I desagree totally.
>>>      
>>>
>>Non-experts contribute text, provided they give
>>their full legal name and 
>>contact details. Experts contribute text and check
>>the non-experts' contributions.
>>    
>>
>Sounds like an interesting idea, but why do we need
>'experts' for?  Anyone can fact and reference check,
>and after facts have been verified with multiple
>sources they are then as 'credible' as credible can be
>in my thinking.
>
>It is time to apply the Wiki philosophy to not just
>providing the content, but to verifying it with
>reference checks from multiple sources.  It worked for
>content, I am sure it will work for verification if
>the community are given the tools (tools such as
>intelligent foot/end notes, autonumbering of
>citations, etc.)
>  
>
Technical issues aside, this has to do with systemic bias, not so much 
in Wikipedia as in the society in general.  It is natural that as 
society members we would bring our biases with us into Wikipedia.  A 
bias perhaps becomes systemic when no-one recognizes it as a bias; it 
takes some dumb little kid to yell out that the emperor has no clothes.

Objective truth has nothing to do with who is saying it. Many of us who 
would write here have been around academic "experts" in the past, and it 
is inevitable that some would have carried away a little of the idolatry 
that comes from that association.  One of the most frequent idolatrous 
statements that I see is "IANAL".  One should have surmised that 
something was wrong 400 years ago when Shakespeare commented, "First 
we'll kill the lawyers."  Society abounds with stories of lawyers and 
politicians (many of whom are lawyers) as thieves and scoundrels, but 
incredibly we continue to defer to their expertise with that short 
disclaimer.

Ec