Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Why is WikiPedia so slow?

[Jonathan King <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On 1/3/06, Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jan 2006, Jonathan King wrote:
> >
> > My advice would be to do something useful, and start your own
> > blankety-blank encyclopedia.  And I'm serious: if you can't live with
> > the wikipedia system, and maybe you do have a justified complaint, then
> > start the joshupedia or the jerripedia or whatever.
>
> I'll just snap my fingers and Mike-o-pedia will magically appear.
> Ready...

Yes, Mike.  I was being...not entirely sincere.  :-)  The problem as I
saw it was this:

Given:
1) Wikipedia is a marvelous tool, albeit with some flaws in the editing process.
2) Somebody uncovers (possibly) one of  those flaws.

Options:

a) Ignore the flaw for the moment; maybe you'll get traction next month.
b) Try to work (really hard) to get the flaw fixed now.
c) Start your own (maybe domain-specific) knowledge base.
d) Conclude that Wikipedia is useless or unworthy.
e) Sue.

Me, I'd go for (a) if (b) were tough.  But (c) is a reasonable option
in some cases.  So it's clear to me that there's stuff in the
talk.origins archive that would be really hard to keep unvandalized in
wikipedia, so there's no problem with there being another information
source on the web, especially since wikipedia can (and I believe does)
link to it.  I just don't  think either of (d) or (e) are very useful
things to do.

And so I said so.  (NB--I'm feeling less cranky after lunch. :-))

jking

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion