Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[emijrp]

2012/3/13 Samuel Klein 

> "Today our digital database is much larger than what we can fit in the
> print set. And it is up to date because we can revise it within
> minutes anytime we need to, and we do it many times each day."
>
>
Wow, they update the encyclopedia many times each day.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[phoebe ayers]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Samuel Klein  wrote:
> 2010's 32-volume set will be its last.  (Now I want to get one, to
> replace my old set!)  Future versions will be digital only.
>
> http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/13/after-244-years-encyclopaedia-britannica-stops-the-presses/?smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/mar/13/encyclopedia-britannica-halts-print-publication
>

I don't use it in print, haven't for years, and have been expecting
something like this for a while, but am still surprisingly saddened by
it too; there's something about the shelf of volumes that encapsulates
the world's knowledge that sort of symbolizes the whole idea of a
library to me.

I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
encyclopedias as a kid? Was a love of print encyclopedias part of your
motivation or interest in becoming a Wikipedian? Is there any value in
them still? Will you miss it?

cheers,
-- phoebe

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[Nathan]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 8:22 PM, phoebe ayers  wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Samuel Klein  wrote:
> > 2010's 32-volume set will be its last.  (Now I want to get one, to
> > replace my old set!)  Future versions will be digital only.
> >
> >
> http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/13/after-244-years-encyclopaedia-britannica-stops-the-presses/?smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto
> >
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/mar/13/encyclopedia-britannica-halts-print-publication
> >
>
> I don't use it in print, haven't for years, and have been expecting
> something like this for a while, but am still surprisingly saddened by
> it too; there's something about the shelf of volumes that encapsulates
> the world's knowledge that sort of symbolizes the whole idea of a
> library to me.
>
> I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
> a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
> include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
> encyclopedias as a kid? Was a love of print encyclopedias part of your
> motivation or interest in becoming a Wikipedian? Is there any value in
> them still? Will you miss it?
>
> cheers,
> -- phoebe
>
>
I used to use them all the time when I was a kid, they were pretty
fantastic. I got the same feeling from them I now recognize from Wikipedia
- the tingly and powerful sense that I could look up almost anything and
find out all kinds of cool details, vast amounts of information just
waiting to be absorbed.  By adulthood, I'd acquired a full Britannica set
and several other smaller (and much older) encyclopedias.

But in the last ten years, pretty much since Wikipedia came around, I
haven't had much use for them. Our interactions have been less fulfilling,
mostly consisting of boxing them up and lugging them around every time I
move. Nowadays, the physical encyclopedias are more collectors items and
household decoration than useful reference works -- and as set pieces, they
lack a certain... mobility. I'll always have some nostalgic regard for the
old heavy volumes, but the final transition to a lighter medium was pretty
inevitable.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[Yaroslav M. Blanter]

> I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
> a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
> include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
> encyclopedias as a kid? Was a love of print encyclopedias part of your
> motivation or interest in becoming a Wikipedian? Is there any value in
> them still? Will you miss it?
> 
> cheers,
> -- phoebe

I did use print encyclopedias as a kid  and actually even as adult, until
late 1990s when it became clear that they are getting surpassed by
electronic media, and it became easier to find information on the internet
and fact-check it. Since I was born in 1967 and grew up in Soviet Union, we
did not have easy access to Britannica, and we had to be satisfied with the
third edition of Great Soviet Encyclopedia - and I guess I read the major
part of it, but still there were things I was interested in and could not
find there. I remember at some point, at the age of 12, I got in my
possession two volumes of an old encyclopedia (smth like Universal
Encyclopedia, I do not remember) from 1913, in English, which had something
on O and P. I remember that they had a long article on Portugal which
contained some extensive info on the history of Portugal, which I could not
find elsewhere - so that I had to decipher it (I basically did not speak
English at the time) and to try to understand what it is about. But I do
not think I will miss them - the information is still there, readily
available, and better structured. I would not say that love of print
encyclopedias was my motivation to start editing Wikipedia - rather, I had
and still have broad range of interests, which motivated me reading
handbooks, encyclopedias, and looking at maps when I was the kid, and since
I still know these things better that 95% of wikipedians I felt I can
considerably contribute here. 

Cheers
Yaroslav

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[Risker]

On 13 March 2012 20:22, phoebe ayers  wrote:

>
> I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
> a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
> include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
> encyclopedias as a kid? Was a love of print encyclopedias part of your
> motivation or interest in becoming a Wikipedian? Is there any value in
> them still? Will you miss it?
>
>
Yes, I'll miss the heavy, fascinating old books.  To this day, nothing
seems better on a stormy day than to curl up with a hot cup of tea in a big
cozy chair, with some kind of book filled with facts - an encyclopedia
volume, an almanac, an atlas... I learned how to read with our old set of
encyclopedias - they were old even when I was reading them - but they
exposed me to so many new ideas and instilled in me a thirst for knowledge
that has never quite been quenched.

Much as I love the internet - and Wikipedia - there is something different
about holding a book in one's hand, about the sense of discovery that is
innately different when physically turning a page. We use different parts
of our brain to read printed matter as compared to computer screens, and
studies are continuing to better understand how this affects the manner in
which people learn and retain knowledge.  It's an interesting commentary
about our society that in just over two generations our Western culture has
gone from the "dream" of families having their own reference library to
considering such printed materials obsolete.

Risker
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[Keegan Peterzell]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 7:22 PM, phoebe ayers  wrote:
>
> I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
> a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
> include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
> encyclopedias as a kid?


I loved encyclopedias as a kid.  My parents had a study hour for my sister
and myself every school night to work on homework or, if that was do, do
something educational.  I would do my homework early to spend the hour
before bed reading our copy of World Book.


> Was a love of print encyclopedias part of your
> motivation or interest in becoming a Wikipedian?


It was my ability to edit it or complain, really.  I registered my
account on the English Wikipedia in 2005 after fixing typos here and there
for a couple years in order to complain about the Main Page Featured
Article, History of Alaska.  The article was all messed up from an
ill-formatted edit, and I wanted to bring it to attention.  I figured it's
only fair to have an account to complain.  Since then I've been working on
support an maintenance to help the content others create.  I'm not an
article writer, so a fantastic feature of Wikipedia is that there are ways
to contribute if this is not your talent.

The fundamental difference between this and my beloved paper encyclopedias
was that you couldn't ask questions or fix something that was wrong.  Those
companies would issue an annual update and corrections, but that's a little
too late.  Placing the encyclopedia in the hands of the wiki format was a
brilliant move by Larry Sanger, it gave the encyclopedia geek white-out and
a pen.


> Is there any value in
> them still? Will you miss it?
>

I will miss it in the way that mine and previous generations value the
touch, weight, and volume of books.  It's a lot more comprehensible to
appreciate the work it takes in writing an encyclopedia when 32 volumes are
dwarfed by what you can create with space on the web.  You can't physically
measure the work put into the words.  But I weigh it out to future
generations not having this appreciate and just feel old when I imagine
myself making this speech in the future to my kid(s).

-- 
~Keegan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[Béria Lima]

My answers to Phoebe questions.  (I tryed to keep it short to not create a
lot of problems to read, if you need a bigger version you can ask me) :)


> *I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from a
> Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to include)
> other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print encyclopedias as a kid?
> *


Yes. My school had the 15th Edition of
Britannicaand I
do remember I used them a lot to learn about pretty much
everything... At some time I even developed the crazy idea of read the full
colletion. I gave up in the middle of book 2, but still was a very fun
thing to do ;)

*Was a love of print encyclopedias part of your motivation or interest in
> becoming a Wikipedian?
> *


I guess in part it was. I had the habit of start every single school
project by looking into Britannica to get the basis for the job, and that
is pretty much what leads me to Wikipedia (an paper on a subject Britannica
doesn't had and I was forced to look online for it)

*Is there any value in them still? Will you miss it?*
>

I will actually look for a copy of the 15th edition (for sentimental
reasons) to buy before they get too rare and too expensive :D Of course I
will miss it! If Britannica is gone we will need to start printing
Wikipedia ;-)
_
*
*

*[image: Inline images 1]*

*Béria Lima*

* *

* Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter
livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano.*

 *Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho.* **







*
** *


On 14 March 2012 02:01, Keegan Peterzell  wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 7:22 PM, phoebe ayers 
> wrote:
> >
> > I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
> > a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
> > include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
> > encyclopedias as a kid?
>
>
> I loved encyclopedias as a kid.  My parents had a study hour for my sister
> and myself every school night to work on homework or, if that was do, do
> something educational.  I would do my homework early to spend the hour
> before bed reading our copy of World Book.
>
>
> > Was a love of print encyclopedias part of your
> > motivation or interest in becoming a Wikipedian?
>
>
> It was my ability to edit it or complain, really.  I registered my
> account on the English Wikipedia in 2005 after fixing typos here and there
> for a couple years in order to complain about the Main Page Featured
> Article, History of Alaska.  The article was all messed up from an
> ill-formatted edit, and I wanted to bring it to attention.  I figured it's
> only fair to have an account to complain.  Since then I've been working on
> support an maintenance to help the content others create.  I'm not an
> article writer, so a fantastic feature of Wikipedia is that there are ways
> to contribute if this is not your talent.
>
> The fundamental difference between this and my beloved paper encyclopedias
> was that you couldn't ask questions or fix something that was wrong.  Those
> companies would issue an annual update and corrections, but that's a little
> too late.  Placing the encyclopedia in the hands of the wiki format was a
> brilliant move by Larry Sanger, it gave the encyclopedia geek white-out and
> a pen.
>
>
> > Is there any value in
> > them still? Will you miss it?
> >
>
> I will miss it in the way that mine and previous generations value the
> touch, weight, and volume of books.  It's a lot more comprehensible to
> appreciate the work it takes in writing an encyclopedia when 32 volumes are
> dwarfed by what you can create with space on the web.  You can't physically
> measure the work put into the words.  But I weigh it out to future
> generations not having this appreciate and just feel old when I imagine
> myself making this speech in the future to my kid(s).
>
> --
> ~Keegan
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
> ___
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[rupert THURNER]

I did use a very old "konversationslexikon" as a child, mainly for the
pictures. With our children this got replaced now by online resources. And
no, not by wikipedia, but by YouTube. And every time I spend 15 minutes to
find a video to illustrate something it makes me a little sad that we as a
group are not able to do it better and create something which would save my
time to search for it.

Rupert.
Am 14.03.2012 01:22 schrieb "phoebe ayers" :

> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Samuel Klein  wrote:
> > 2010's 32-volume set will be its last.  (Now I want to get one, to
> > replace my old set!)  Future versions will be digital only.
> >
> >
> http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/13/after-244-years-encyclopaedia-britannica-stops-the-presses/?smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto
> >
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/mar/13/encyclopedia-britannica-halts-print-publication
> >
>
> I don't use it in print, haven't for years, and have been expecting
> something like this for a while, but am still surprisingly saddened by
> it too; there's something about the shelf of volumes that encapsulates
> the world's knowledge that sort of symbolizes the whole idea of a
> library to me.
>
> I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
> a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
> include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
> encyclopedias as a kid? Was a love of print encyclopedias part of your
> motivation or interest in becoming a Wikipedian? Is there any value in
> them still? Will you miss it?
>
> cheers,
> -- phoebe
>
> ___
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[David Gerard]

On 14 March 2012 00:22, phoebe ayers  wrote:

> I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
> a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
> include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
> encyclopedias as a kid? Was a love of print encyclopedias part of your
> motivation or interest in becoming a Wikipedian? Is there any value in
> them still? Will you miss it?


Big time. I used to read encyclopedias all the time as a kid. I
picture my audience as a Wikipedia writer as a bright ten- to
twelve-year-old kid who knows nothing about anything yet but wants to
- writing for my past self. My grandmother bought them for me -
various mediocre encyclopedias sold in newsagents at one volume a week
in the late '70s. Doing this pretty much wrecked her attempts to make
me religious ... amazing what the power to be allowed to know things
can do.

The problem with Britannica as a print encyclopedia is that ... pretty
much no-one read or used it. People compare Wikipedia to Britannica,
but I think they're comparing the real Wikipedia in front of them with
a fantasy ideal Britannica they don't actually use and won't have
looked at since they were in school. If they were lucky enough to be
at a school with a copy. Wikipedia is the first encyclopedia ever
that's actually popular.

I suspect a lot of us started as huge encyclopedia nerds and still
think of Britannica as the gold standard we aspire to. Even if we
haven't looked at it in years either.


- d.

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[David Gerard]

On 14 March 2012 07:33, rupert THURNER  wrote:

> I did use a very old "konversationslexikon" as a child, mainly for the
> pictures. With our children this got replaced now by online resources. And
> no, not by wikipedia, but by YouTube. And every time I spend 15 minutes to
> find a video to illustrate something it makes me a little sad that we as a
> group are not able to do it better and create something which would save my
> time to search for it.


My daughter is 4yo and dinosaur-mad. THANK YOU WIKIPEDIA FOR EXISTING.
(I haven't broken the news to her yet that dinosaurs probably didn't
actually go "RAW!" She does know lots of them had feathers, and
that birds are a type of dinosaur.)

She's also madly into interesting fish (a side-effect of watching The
Octonauts on CBeebies), and I love the fact that I can go onto YouTube
and find a minute-long amateur video of pretty much any fish that's
videoable. So what we need is to encourage those people to put their
amateur videos under a free licence.


- d.

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[David Gerard]

On 14 March 2012 05:16, Béria Lima  wrote:

> I will actually look for a copy of the 15th edition (for sentimental
> reasons) to buy before they get too rare and too expensive :D Of course I
> will miss it! If Britannica is gone we will need to start printing
> Wikipedia ;-)


I see old sets of Britannica and other encyclopedias cheap on eBay.
The catch is usually "buyer must collect" :-)


- d.

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[Béria Lima]

Sure, that isn't the problem ;) go to USA is *so* cheap those days ;)

I was actually about to go request the one from my old school, they should
give the book to the only girl who read the full school library right? ;)
(well, 80% but I left before graduate from  High School, so I might had got
the mark ;) )
_
*
*

*[image: Inline images 1]*

*Béria Lima*

* *

* Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter
livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano.*



*Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho.* **







*
** *


On 14 March 2012 04:55, David Gerard  wrote:

> On 14 March 2012 05:16, Béria Lima  wrote:
>
> > I will actually look for a copy of the 15th edition (for sentimental
> > reasons) to buy before they get too rare and too expensive :D Of course I
> > will miss it! If Britannica is gone we will need to start printing
> > Wikipedia ;-)
>
>
> I see old sets of Britannica and other encyclopedias cheap on eBay.
> The catch is usually "buyer must collect" :-)
>
>
> - d.
>
> ___
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[THURNER rupert]

I did use a very old "konversationslexikon" as a child, mainly for the
pictures. With our children this got replaced now by online resources. And
no, not by wikipedia, but by YouTube. And every time I spend 15 minutes to
find a video to illustrate something it makes me a little sad that we as a
group are not able to do it better and create something which would save my
time to search for it.

I edit wikipedia so it will save my time when I will search for something
(even the same thing) in future.

Rupert.

Am 14.03.2012 01:22 schrieb "phoebe ayers" :
>
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Samuel Klein  wrote:
> > 2010's 32-volume set will be its last.  (Now I want to get one, to
> > replace my old set!)  Future versions will be digital only.
> >
> >
http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/13/after-244-years-encyclopaedia-britannica-stops-the-presses/?smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto
> >
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/mar/13/encyclopedia-britannica-halts-print-publication
> >
>
> I don't use it in print, haven't for years, and have been expecting
> something like this for a while, but am still surprisingly saddened by
> it too; there's something about the shelf of volumes that encapsulates
> the world's knowledge that sort of symbolizes the whole idea of a
> library to me.
>
> I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
> a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
> include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
> encyclopedias as a kid? Was a love of print encyclopedias part of your
> motivation or interest in becoming a Wikipedian? Is there any value in
> them still? Will you miss it?
>
> cheers,
> -- phoebe
>
> ___
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[Amir E. Aharoni]

2012/3/14 David Gerard :
> On 14 March 2012 05:16, Béria Lima  wrote:
>
>> I will actually look for a copy of the 15th edition (for sentimental
>> reasons) to buy before they get too rare and too expensive :D Of course I
>> will miss it! If Britannica is gone we will need to start printing
>> Wikipedia ;-)
>
>
> I see old sets of Britannica and other encyclopedias cheap on eBay.
> The catch is usually "buyer must collect" :-)

The rather wonderful 34-volume Encyclopedia Hebraica can easily be
found on a popular Israeli "free giveaway" site with the same
condition... and at a lot of garbage containers :,,(

Even though it was last updated in 1980, i have all the volumes right
near my working desk and i actually open it at least once a month to
actually find information.

--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[Chris Keating]

I had a small encyclopedia at home (only one volume, but a massive volume)
and there was a copy of Britannica in the local library and, later, at
secondary school.

But I started getting frustrated with them when I was about 12 or 13,
because the shorter articles rarely answered the questions I had, and I
never happened t be looking up something with one of the longer articles...

(all of this was a good few years the Internet took off...)

Chris
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[Domas Mituzas]

> did you use print encyclopedias as a kid? 

Oh yes. I especially loved #6 of Lithuanian Soviet Encyclopedia 
http://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaizdas:Lietuviskoji_tarybine_enciklopedija_resize.jpg
 - L* had airplanes and M* had automobiles ;)
B* had whales (hence my obsession with Exploding Whale article nowadays ;-) 
Scanning the volumes and looking for interesting articles was sure one of 
activities :)

I had a dream of buying a Britannica set once I have my own home. 
Unfortunately, getting my new home somehow also aligned with me finding 
Wikipedia, and on a very first glance I knew I had to work on this thing, in 
one way or another.

And indeed, any other book back in the day that would satisfy the curiosity was 
eagerly consumed, but nowadays online world gives us way more opportunities. 
Paper encyclopedias were the easiest to reach back in the day (Wikipedia is 
easiest to reach online source now, right? :)

Cheers,
Domas
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses:, Britannica to stop printing books

[Robin McCain]

Why did the articles in Brittania keep getting shorter? Because printing 
on paper costs money. Storage on the Internet is  free by comparison. - 
So why do our editors insist on reducing what might be an interesting 
article down to something so brief it might as well be on paper in a 
book that will be recycled in a few years - or deleting content completely?


This whole idea of editing for brevity and notability came from the 
TRADITIONAL encyclopedia business...  Wikipedia was supposed to be the 
opposite - big enough to include anything of importance to people.


It is socially and historically interesting to compare very old edition 
of Brittanica to a newer edition. For example: an entry on battleships 
would evolve from a discussion of wooden ships powered by sail that 
enforced seapower of an empire to sidewheelers, to iron ships fired by 
coal to the current thinking that battleships are too expensive. In an 
online encyclopedia it is possible to include all these articles side by 
side into a section on the evolution of battleships.


I find it bizarre that inclusion of information of local importance is 
encouraged in the internationalized local language wikipediae but 
discouraged in the U.S. English wikipedia.  So events of local interest 
in a town in Romania are desirable but the same cannot be said of a 
similar event in San Jose, California.


On 3/14/2012 1:15 AM, foundation-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:

But I started getting frustrated with them when I was about 12 or 13,
because the shorter articles rarely answered the questions I had, and I
never happened t be looking up something with one of the longer articles...


___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[phoebe ayers]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 5:22 PM, phoebe ayers  wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Samuel Klein  wrote:
>> 2010's 32-volume set will be its last.  (Now I want to get one, to
>> replace my old set!)  Future versions will be digital only.
>>
>> http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/13/after-244-years-encyclopaedia-britannica-stops-the-presses/?smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/mar/13/encyclopedia-britannica-halts-print-publication
>>
>
> I don't use it in print, haven't for years, and have been expecting
> something like this for a while, but am still surprisingly saddened by
> it too; there's something about the shelf of volumes that encapsulates
> the world's knowledge that sort of symbolizes the whole idea of a
> library to me.
>
> I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
> a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
> include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
> encyclopedias as a kid? Was a love of print encyclopedias part of your
> motivation or interest in becoming a Wikipedian? Is there any value in
> them still? Will you miss it?

All,

This has been one of our best threads in a long, long time :) Thank
you all for sharing your stories.

This is what I was working on, it just went up on the site 5 minutes ago:
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/03/14/britannica-define-outdated/if-you-liked-britannica-youll-love-wikipedia

Thank you so much to Nathan for letting me use his quote, and to SJ
for a little midnight copyediting help -- it was short notice :) I
would have including more quotes but I was already 100 words over
limit, lol!

But reading this thread made me think that there is actually a much
longer piece that could be written with all of these anecdotes about
encyclopedias -- I'd love to work on an essay about our experiences.
Maybe on meta, if anyone else is interested.

thanks,
phoebe

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses:, Britannica to stop printing books

[Ziko van Dijk]

Dear Robin,

There are several reasons for making a text not too long. Pity with
the reader is one of them.

I personally try to be reluctant with generalizations about Wikipeda
language versions. They usually are not true. It's often like the
thing that the grass in the neighbour's yard is greener.

Kind regards
Ziko



Robin:
I find it bizarre that inclusion of information of local importance is
encouraged in the internationalized local language wikipediae but
discouraged in the U.S. English wikipedia.  So events of local
interest in a town in Romania are desirable but the same cannot be
said of a similar event in San Jose, California.




2012/3/14 Robin McCain :
> Why did the articles in Brittania keep getting shorter? Because printing on
> paper costs money. Storage on the Internet is  free by comparison. - So why
> do our editors insist on reducing what might be an interesting article down
> to something so brief it might as well be on paper in a book that will be
> recycled in a few years - or deleting content completely?
>
> This whole idea of editing for brevity and notability came from the
> TRADITIONAL encyclopedia business...  Wikipedia was supposed to be the
> opposite - big enough to include anything of importance to people.
>
> It is socially and historically interesting to compare very old edition of
> Brittanica to a newer edition. For example: an entry on battleships would
> evolve from a discussion of wooden ships powered by sail that enforced
> seapower of an empire to sidewheelers, to iron ships fired by coal to the
> current thinking that battleships are too expensive. In an online
> encyclopedia it is possible to include all these articles side by side into
> a section on the evolution of battleships.
>
> I find it bizarre that inclusion of information of local importance is
> encouraged in the internationalized local language wikipediae but
> discouraged in the U.S. English wikipedia.  So events of local interest in a
> town in Romania are desirable but the same cannot be said of a similar event
> in San Jose, California.
>
> On 3/14/2012 1:15 AM, foundation-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
>>
>> But I started getting frustrated with them when I was about 12 or 13,
>> because the shorter articles rarely answered the questions I had, and I
>> never happened t be looking up something with one of the longer
>> articles...
>
>
> ___
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l



-- 

---
Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland
dr. Ziko van Dijk, voorzitter
http://wmnederland.nl/
---

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses:, Britannica to stop printing books

[Robin McCain]

I don't think it is pity to reduce an 800 word article down to under 200 
words. Instead of something readable you end up either with a Who's Who 
entry - filled with insider abbreviations and obscure wording that must 
be decoded or something so bland it has no value to anyone intrested 
enough to look it up.


On 3/14/2012 4:41 PM, foundation-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:

Dear Robin,

There are several reasons for making a text not too long. Pity with
the reader is one of them.
My point here is that even Brittanica is inherently very English 
centric. Why should an obscure ficticious 17th century event in the U.K. 
be of more value than an equally obscure event in Honduras (or 
wherever)? If I were living in Honduras, I'd be much more interested in 
MY local history - which is quite likely to be relevant to my situation 
instead of something in a country I'd never visited. Inverting the 
situation - If I visit the U.K. I want to be able to access information 
on the event in the U.K. but I don't care about Honduras.  This is an 
ordinary person's perspective - not that of a scholar searching for 
obscure information wherever it may be.



I personally try to be reluctant with generalizations about Wikipeda
language versions. They usually are not true. It's often like the
thing that the grass in the neighbour's yard is greener.


___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses:, Britannica to stop printing books

[Svip]

On 14 March 2012 17:34, Robin McCain  wrote:

> I find it bizarre that inclusion of information of local importance is
> encouraged in the internationalized local language wikipediae but
> discouraged in the U.S. English wikipedia.

What U.S. English Wikipedia?  I have read plenty of articles in
English on that Wikipedia.

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses:, Britannica to stop printing books

[Samuel Klein]

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Robin McCain  wrote:
> I find it bizarre that inclusion of information of local importance is
> encouraged in the internationalized local language wikipediae but
> discouraged in the U.S. English wikipedia.  So events of local interest in a
> town in Romania are desirable but the same cannot be said of a similar event
> in San Jose, California.

In general I think we should be relaxing notability guidelines so that
we can cover increasingly local knowledge, while improving our
browsing and review tools -- so people can both visually perceive the
spectrum of notability (from hyperlocal to epochally historic) and
more effectively review topics that have coverage in more local and
less globally-reputable sources.

Small wikis don't need to worry about the side effects of having a
large database with limited tools to review it.

S

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses:, Britannica to stop printing books

[geni]

On 14 March 2012 16:34, Robin McCain  wrote:
> I find it bizarre that inclusion of information of local importance is
> encouraged in the internationalized local language wikipediae but
> discouraged in the U.S. English wikipedia.  So events of local interest in a
> town in Romania are desirable but the same cannot be said of a similar event
> in San Jose, California.


Local events in western countries are pretty easy to cover within
wikipedia's rules. A mix of local news and the local history mob
usually sees that there are plenty of sources.

On the other hand writing about Odek (Joseph Kony's home village) is
pretty much impossible.

-- 
geni

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses:, , Britannica to stop printing books

[Robin McCain]

On 3/15/2012 3:10 AM, foundation-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:

Local events in western countries are pretty easy to cover within
wikipedia's rules. A mix of local news and the local history mob
usually sees that there are plenty of sources.

On the other hand writing about Odek (Joseph Kony's home village) is
pretty much impossible.
In that specific case you'd need a team of archeologists and war crimes 
investigators to collect raw data and analyze it.


How much of this general lack of published information is due to local 
government policies (past or present) or destruction of records and how 
much is related to a recent conversion from oral history to written 
documents?


The willful suppression or destruction of historical records is one 
thing, lack of recordkeeping another.


It is pretty obvious that recording of history must start somewhere. 
Even though that recording might not meet the WP standards for 2nd or 
3rd layer analysis of 1st layer eyewitness accounts it still has value.


Is there a WMF project to get this process of historical bootstrapping 
started in such locations? If not, perhaps we need to tie into another 
organization that is already working on this...


___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses:, , Britannica to stop printing books

[geni]

On 15 March 2012 15:23, Robin McCain  wrote:
> In that specific case you'd need a team of archeologists and war crimes
> investigators to collect raw data and analyze it.

One Acholi speaking anthropologist would be enough.

> How much of this general lack of published information is due to local
> government policies (past or present) or destruction of records and how much
> is related to a recent conversion from oral history to written documents?

I'm not sure when Acholi first appeared in a written form but all the
examples I can find are in the latin alphabet so can't be that far
back. Other than that the area was outside the colonial heartland
(nominally British but largely nominally)  so early European coverage
tends towards being the somewhat exaggerated tales of men of
independent means going around shooting stuff (okay slightly unfair).
Later on there are a few missionaries and the like setting up schools
but they seem to have stayed close to the major centers of population
(in this case Gulu). May be some military records since the British
empire did recruit troops in that area. Might be some decent records
from the post independence area when the Acholi were in their
ascendency. After that though things are a bit messy.


> The willful suppression or destruction of historical records is one thing,
> lack of recordkeeping another.

Alternatively the European tradition of sinking significant resources
into record keeping could be considered odd.

> It is pretty obvious that recording of history must start somewhere. Even
> though that recording might not meet the WP standards for 2nd or 3rd layer
> analysis of 1st layer eyewitness accounts it still has value.
>
> Is there a WMF project to get this process of historical bootstrapping
> started in such locations? If not, perhaps we need to tie into another
> organization that is already working on this...

There is an oral history project but I'm not sure how viable that is.

-- 
geni

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses: Britannica to stop printing books

[Jussi-Ville Heiskanen]

A many people on this list all know this by heart but since
this is testimonial time -- and not all of you know me that
extensively -- very briefly:

First modern encyclopaedia me and my sister had was a
very cheaply produced set called Combi, written in
Finnish, with 5 colour printed volumes, and two with
mostly linedrawing thumbails, with very short articles.
Used to take those on our family sailing trips, long and
short. Soon had read the coloiur printed volumes of
what we might call featured articles from front to
back, several times. Just last year, shed a few
quite nostalgic tears recently after going through
the effects of my recently deceased mother, but
for involved reasons which I won't go into had to
throw them into the trash, wondering if that was
only set of that still existing.

We did have older encylopaedias, and their coverage
*was* both more interesting and very their treatement
much more in depth, if for natural reasons far from
up to date.

But to Ecnyclopaedia Britannica. I own the set that
was printed and published 1974-1975. As a child I
would choose the library I skipped class at for two
things. The library had to have either a good set
of Plato's Dialogues or Britannica, or ideally
both -- constrained somewhat by opening hours,
in my choice. I do believe I have consulted the
print EB in the last year or two, with good results,
on subjects where Wikipedia still has notable
lacunae, notably the arts. Those instances
are however mostly notable for their scarceness.

-- 
--
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses:, Britannica to stop printing books

[David Goodman]

For English, and other languages also:

What I suggest is a '''Wikipedia Two''  - an encyclopedia supplement
where the standard of notability  is much relaxed, but which will be
different from Wikia by still requiring  Verifiability and NPOV. It
would include the lower levels of barely  notable articles in
Wikipedia, and  a good deal of what we do not let in.

It would for example include both high schools and elementary schools.
It would include college athletes. It would include political
candidates. It would include neighborhood businesses, and fire
departments.  It would include individual asteroids.  It would include
streets--and also villages. It would include ever ball game in a
season.   It would include anyone who had a credited role in a film,
or any named character in one--both the ones we currently leave out,
and the ones we put in.

This should satisfy both the inclusionists and the deletionists. The
deletionists would have this material out of Wikipedia, the
inclusionists would have it not rejected. Newcomers would have an open
and accepting place for a initial experience.

But it would be interesting to see the results of a search option:
Do you want to see everything (WP+WP2), or only the really notable (WP)?
Anyone care to guess which people would choose?



On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 4:07 AM, geni  wrote:
> On 14 March 2012 16:34, Robin McCain  wrote:
David Goodman

DGG at the enWP
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Stopping the presses:, Britannica to stop printing books

[Chris Keating]

>
>
>
> It is socially and historically interesting to compare very old edition of
> Brittanica to a newer edition. For example: an entry on battleships would
> evolve from a discussion of wooden ships powered by sail that enforced
> seapower of an empire to sidewheelers, to iron ships fired by coal to the
> current thinking that battleships are too expensive. In an online
> encyclopedia it is possible to include all these articles side by side into
> a section on the evolution of battleships.


Well, I'm glad to see someone's reading those articles :-)

Chris
(the main author of the English Wikipedia articles on Battleship, Ironclad
warship, Pre-Dreadnought, and Dreadnought)
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l