[Wikipedia-l] Do we really need a Sifter project?

Sun Jul 27 10:51:22 UTC 2003

Erik wrote:
>Well, here's the thing. Our Main Page is protected. 
>Our Main Page links to the Brilliant Prose page,
> which would also be protected. The Brilliant Prose 
>page would only link to verified revisions of articles. 
>A user can choose this path
>
>Main Page->Brilliant prose->Article

As I said - I think that is a great idea. But I also see within that idea a 
way to kick-start Nupedia and feed it already high-quality content. Then 
Nupedians (most of whom will also be Wikipedians) have relatively little to 
do except certify content based on their own credentials. 

GNU/Linux distros do this all the time - polishing of the free software code 
so that it fit for the masses. This does not prevent the KDE people from 
first having their own stabilization process. However the result of the two 
processes is a superior product in the end.

>And they will never see an "unstable" article -- these 
>pages would always be in a reasonable state. It is the 
>same thing as a separate site, but happens entirely 
>within Wikipedia. We might have to streamline the whole  
process -- turn BP into a directory of pages, make this directory
> part of  the start page, and warn readers that pages linked
>from pages within that directory may not necessarily be in as 
>good quality. This would not preclude us from also using a 
>category system that contains *all* Wikipedia pages, not just 
>filtered ones. On the other hand, we would retain wikiness and 
>encourage people to also browse and participate in our unstable 
>sections. I think that's a good thing.

Again - all great ideas. 

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)