> Marc Riddell wrote: >> And, on not-so-obscure websites, where there is a clear - and acute - >> academiphobia present. >> >> on 4/23/10 10:31 AM, Charles Matthews at charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
> I can show you the academic mathematicians editing, if you like. It's > worth analysing the "black legend" that Wikipedia hates academics, > though. Fred's comment "Serious academics are knocking down big bucks > and writing books" is partly wrong. It would apply to, say, [[Niall > Ferguson]], though it must be said that his reputation has taken > something of a hit recently. It would not apply to academics who are in > academia because money is low on their list of priorities (yes, these > guys are definitely not normal). It would not apply to academics who > enjoy intellectual work, while writing books is mainly work work. It > seems to me that we get many graduate students editing: now why would > these people be at the same time academiphobic, and putting themselved > into straitened circumstance to hammer on the door of an academic career? > > Having interacted with a couple of the more high-profile academics who > have run into serious trouble on WP, I think I know the conditions that > cause the trouble (roughly speaking, a lack of acceptance that a website > is going to have policies and is entitled to have them, quite > indepedently of the eminence of someone who would like to turn pages to > other uses). I believe there must be many more cases of "I think what > you're doing is not that interesting" from academics, than such > trainwrecks. I believe the attitude we have to credentials is relatively > sensible - typically a doctorate doesn't qualify anyone to pontificate > over more than a small area. > > And the clear blue water between WP and CZ is not necessarily > disadvantageous to us. They reportedly have some issues with fringe > science being supported by their hierarchy, to the extent that it could > be an embarassment to dislodge it. What WP certainly has is a > disrespectfulness for the person set against a respect for the > referencing of what they submit. I'm yet to be convinced that that is a > wrong decision. It certainly beats the other way round. > The gentleman doth protest too much, methinks. Stick to numbers, Charles, the human equation clearly eludes you. MR _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l