On 2 October 2010 07:58, Peter Damian <peter.dam...@btinternet.com> wrote: > From: "David Gerard" <dger...@gmail.com>
>> http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pcbi.1000941 >> With some fields going to this effort and not others, ultimately it's >> up to the specialists in the fields themselves to bother. So what do >> the biologists have that the philosophers - or other fields that are >> ill-represented in Wikipedia - lack? > So here am I looking for systematic reasons why philosophy, and humanities > in general are under-represented in Wikipedia and you are saying that it is > because philosophers - and by implication specialists in humanities - don't > bother? Interesting. I once got puzzled why certain plants wouldn't grow > in my garden. I got frustrated and thought perhaps the plants weren't > bothering. Then I found that because my garden is north facing and has acid > soil, the plants that like sunlight and don't like acid soil, weren't > flourishing. That's wonderfully poetic and doesn't answer the question I asked: *what* about the approach in this paper wouldn't work for philosophy, in your opinion? Please be specific. - d. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l