Isn't there an endemic confusion in the Wikipedias between what are primary sources (produced by the subject) and primary sources (original sources, as in History)? While the first should be avoided at all costs, the second should be preferred over secondary sources most of the time, as they generally are more reliable and verifiable. I keep seeing this confusion in Wikipedias, all the time, with disastrous results on the quality of the articles.
Paulo 2018-05-11 5:49 GMT+01:00 Cameron <came...@cameron11598.net>: > Well audio recordings or video recordings of oral histories and traditions > come to mind. However I'm not sure how comfortable I am with an > encyclopedia using such sources. > > Now as an aspiring historian (Only one semester left on my degree), I use > primary sources quite often for papers, and projects however those are > generally frowned upon for Wikipedia; mainly because Wikipedia is an > encyclopedia not an academic journal. Good encyclopedias are typically > sourced from secondary sources, and ocassionaly tertiary sources. > > Now compiling a repository of such orally transmitted histories and > traditions would be an amazing idea for a new project in my opinion. My > personal thought on this issue is keeping our current verifiability and > notability requirements is a good idea. In some areas I think we include > far too much (fan cruft anyone?). > > - Cameron C. > Cameron11598 > > ---- On Thu, 10 May 2018 21:34:15 -0700 peter.southw...@telkomsa.net > wrote ---- > > If not written, how would they be referenced and verified? > Cheers, > Peter > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On > Behalf Of Jean-Philippe Béland > Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 6:28 AM > To: Wikimedia Mailing List > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems > > You are missing the whole point. I'm not talking about second guessing > sources but rather changing our narrow point of views of what we consider > sources of knowledge. A lot of cultures are of oral tradition and not > written. > > JP > > On Thu, May 10, 2018, 16:42 Todd Allen, <toddmal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Abandoning notability and verifiability is a wide open sign for spammers > > and hoaxers. We have enough of that without giving them an engraved > > invitation. > > > > If published sources are biased, the efforts to correct that should be > made > > at the source (literally) level. Just like rather than "disputing" a > > reliable source, if we found evidence that contradicts them, we'd ask > them > > to correct, and then once they do we'll update the article accordingly > > based on their correction. Wikipedia is not there to second-guess what > > sources choose to publish or find "alternative" or "non-western" or > > whatever else have you types of information. If our references are > flawed, > > the solution lies in getting them to correct what they're doing, not > > "correcting" for any perceived bias by editors. We reflect sources, we do > > not second-guess, dispute, or correct them. > > > > Todd > > > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Peter Southwood < > > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote: > > > > > When Wikipedia was new and unknown there were not so many people > wanting > > > to use it for purposes that conflict with our purposes. Times change. > > > Cheers, > > > Peter > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On > > > Behalf Of Jean-Philippe Béland > > > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 5:30 PM > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems > > > > > > If we where that septic at the beginning, we will never have started > > > Wikipedia to begin with. Really, an encyclopedia written by anyone > > without > > > any authority to double check before it is published? It is doomed to > > fail. > > > Yes, in theory, but practice showed us otherwise. The question is not > to > > > remove notability and verifiability requirements, but to change those > > > requirements to be more inclusive of different ways of sharing > > knowledge. I > > > think practice can show us otherwise in that case too if we are ready > to > > do > > > that leap of faith, the same way we did at the beginning of Wikipedia > > when > > > we opened editing to anybody. > > > > > > JP > > > > > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 11:05 AM Peter Southwood < > > > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote: > > > > > > > One Jar'Edo Wens hoax is enough, and that lasted 10 years in spite of > > > > notability and verifiability requirements, Without the verifiability > > > > requirement it would probably still be there. Leaps of faith are > > things > > > > that I do not generally do, I am a natural sceptic and prefer > evidence, > > > and > > > > where possible, reproducible results. When the evidence is > intangible, > > > the > > > > authors must take responsibility for their work, and that means track > > > > record and proof of identity. > > > > This would be more easily fitted into a new project. I do not see it > as > > > > possible in Wikipedia. If the new project became recognised as a > > reliable > > > > source then Wikipedia could use it as a source, without destroying > the > > > > credibility we have. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Peter > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] > On > > > > Behalf Of Gnangarra > > > > Sent: 10 May 2018 15:50 > > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List > > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems > > > > > > > > notability and verifiability are important, every culture and > > language > > > > has this issue when it comes to sharing knowledge. These culture > > manage > > > > successfully to share knowledge many of them long before the western > > > styles > > > > were developed, I'd say they are robust alternatives. The issue is > how > > > do > > > > we bring these sources into the western system, how do we respect > them, > > > > how do we teach ourselves to understand that what we currently do is > > not > > > > the only. > > > > > > > > There are risks in potential abuses of every system, even our current > > > > systems have their faults and we assume good faith in the citations > > from > > > > books published but no digital. Changing the way we consider and > value > > > > alternative knowledge streams will take a leap of faith, the question > > is > > > do > > > > we really want to take that leap, do we really want to share the sum > of > > > all > > > > knowledge, do we want to address inherent bias in our current > knowledge > > > > networks or are we comfortable with just token efforts. > > > > > > > > Maybe the solution isnt in incorporating directly into the wikipedia > > but > > > > rather the creation of new project to bring forth these alternative > > > > knowledge streams > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10 May 2018 at 21:47, Eduardo Testart <etest...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > I posted this a while ago, an investigation on gender bias where a > > > member > > > > > of Wikimedia Chile was involved, in his personal capacity though: > > > > > https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10. > > > > > 1140/epjds/s13688-016-0066-4 > > > > > > > > > > There are many things that can be addressed individually and as a > > > > movement > > > > > or collective, if we believe the conclusions are valid, which I > > > > personally > > > > > do, since they are supported with data and not on our personal > > > > impressions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers! > > > > > > > > > > El jue., may. 10, 2018 10:27, Peter Southwood < > > > > > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> > > > > > escribió: > > > > > > > > > > > Notability and verifiability are important. They allow us to > > produce > > > > > > reasonably reliable work. Moving away from those constraints > opens > > > the > > > > > > doors to extremely unreliable material. If Wikipedia is to remain > > > open > > > > to > > > > > > anyone to edit, there do not appear to be any robust > alternatives. > > > > Other > > > > > > projects may work around this problem, but would then probably > not > > be > > > > > open > > > > > > for anyone to edit. Or can you suggest another way? > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Peter > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@ > lists.wikimedia.org] > > > On > > > > > > Behalf Of Jean-Philippe Béland > > > > > > Sent: 10 May 2018 15:01 > > > > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems > > > > > > > > > > > > "Nothing odd, it's baked in: Wikipedia is a summary of the canon > of > > > > > > knowledge, the corpus of generally accepted knowledge." > > > > > > > > > > > > But it is what we accept as part of the canon of "knowledge" as > > > > Wikipedia > > > > > > that could be improved. We have a very western approach to that > > > saying > > > > > that > > > > > > it needs to be published in such books or journals to be notable > > > > enough, > > > > > > when different cultures use different ways to build their canon > of > > > > > > knowledge. > > > > > > > > > > > > JP > > > > > > User:Amqui > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 5:53 AM FRED BAUDER < > > fredb...@fairpoint.net> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > > From: Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> > > > > > > > Sent: Thu, 10 May 2018 04:02:46 -0400 (EDT) > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ...because of our rules regarding references. Oddly, > > > > > > > Wikipedia can at best only echo the systemic bias, but will > never > > > be > > > > > able > > > > > > > to correct it." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothing odd, it's baked in: Wikipedia is a summary of the canon > > of > > > > > > > knowledge, the corpus of generally accepted knowledge. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The knowledge industry could do better. And when it does, > > Wikipedia > > > > > will > > > > > > > reflect that. in the meantime it is helpful if gender and other > > > bias > > > > > > issues > > > > > > > are noted and accommodated. Our mission is more modest than > full > > > > > > correction > > > > > > > of all bias, but we can contribute or even lead. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fred > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > > > > Unsubscribe: > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject= > > > unsubscribe> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ > > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org > > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. > > > > > > http://www.avg.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ > > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org > > ?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > > Unsubscribe: > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject= > unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > GN. > > > > Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page > > > > WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra > > > > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com > > > > Out now: A.Gaynor, P. Newman and P. Jennings (eds.), *Never Again: > > > > Reflections on Environmental Responsibility after Roe 8*, UWAP, 2017. > > > > Order > > > > here > > > > < > > > > https://uwap.uwa.edu.au/products/never-again- > > > reflections-on-environmental-responsibility-after-roe-8 > > > > > > > > > . > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
