[WikiEN-l] Following up -

Thu Oct 30 01:02:44 UTC 2003

Eileen wrote:

>I entered this fray because I thought the Wikipedia concept had merit. 
>However without a responsible editor or editorial board which will make clear
>what will NOT be accepted there is no chance of producing the reliable source of
>accurate information I would like to see used.
>
Since you purport to have some scientific understanding, I think you'll 
agree
that it's not valid to draw sweeping conclusions about a 300,000+ article
encyclopedia from a sample size of one or two. In fact, there are a 
number of
experts working here as editors, and there are many articles with material
of higher quality than is now available anywhere else, on- or offline, 
so your
claim is simply wrong. Wikipedia has been in existence for only three 
years, and
there has simply not been enough people and enough time to write all of the
material you would like to see, and unfortunately some of that time has been
taken up in defending ourselves from the people who have been throwing rocks
rather than helping.

I don't know if you're aware of GNU and Linux; when I started working
on the compiler in 1989, the project had already been in existence for six
years, but very few people thought it would go much of anywhere. Now, on its
20th anniversary, the process, software, and people have been thoroughly
vindicated; they have been adopted by the largest computer companies
in the world (IBM etc), and the most powerful software company (Microsoft)
is on the defensive. Best of all, my dubious friends have had to admit
I was right to believe. :-)

Like GNU/Linux, WP has repeatedly surpassed the limits set on it by
the naysayers, and I believe it will continue to do so.

Stan