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

Thu Jan 6 10:02:33 UTC 2005

Daniel Mayer:
> I respect Larry and what he did to help Wikipedia along in its first year. But
> I will never just assume that somebody with a PhD is right since many PhDs all
> too often are not; I've come across and know of a good many PhDs who have axes
> to grind and who have pet theories to push.
> 
> NPOV is a much better guarantee of accuracy than trusting a supposed expert
> (although I do highly value feedback from field experts - I just don't take
> their ideas as the last word).

I disagree. NPOV does not in any way guarantee accuracy. At best it
stops the most extreme cases of theory-pushing, at worst it leads to a
ridiculous degree of relativism.

And even where NPOV is concerned, an expert is much more useful than
just someone off the street. A non-expert POV-warrior will easily blow
away a non-expert NPOV-fighter, simply because he is the one who has
read at least something about the subject. An expert POV-warrior will
have a much harder time fighting an expert NPOV-fighter.

I think there's a large area between "valuing feedback" and "giving
the last word". It would be worthwhile to explore it. And it would be
worthwhile to make a decision whom we DO give the last word.

> Many in academia are used to being the gatekeepers and stewards of
> information. Wiki opens those gates to anybody with an Internet connection. So
> many in academia will always recoil in horror at the mere concept - that is
> their problem, their failing, not ours.

Maybe it should be our problem. Maybe we should be listening to what
others see as problems with our methods, rather than closing our ears
and shouting how great it is. Wikipedia is great, but that should not
stop us from trying to find ways to make it even better.

Andre Engels