I am not discouraging people from working on wikipedia. I am encouraging people
to contribute to other sources as well.
"I personally have spent more time on other things outside of Wikipedia."
Good. that's just what I'm saying. We agree on that.
What we should look for are sites that have better control over what goes
into, and stays in, the entries. So 1) sites with more peer review, 2)
who use contributions and peer review by people who identify themselves
with their real names, so it's not just any anonymous person who may not know
anything on the topic, and 3) entries that once they get peer reviewed,
aren't subject to random changes by any anonymous person, who may know
nothing.
So look for web projects that have good ways to show they are "credible", for
example by following these guidelines from the Stanford University Credibility
Project
http://credibility.stanford.edu/guidelines/index.html
like: use references, show that the authors have expertise, list the actual
people who are behind the site, or work or paper etc.
This is a "positive assertions about why we should do work elsewhere."
Gene
_______________________________________________
okfn-discuss mailing list
okfn-discuss@lists.okfn.org
http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-discuss
