Hi, I'm in Rainbow Beach this weekend on holiday (and hadn't intended to get involved in WP stuff), but Whiteghost is correct here. I would point out that even Wikipedia, like most encyclopædias itself recommends that you use the site as the start of research and gaining an understanding of a topic, not as the complete sum of any reading you do on it.
A cursory reading of a Wikipedia article will not on its own give a government minister enough depth of knowledge to start forming national policy on any issue. Cheers, Craig Franklin President - Wikimedia Australia On 25 October 2013 09:08, <wikimediaau-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote: > Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 10:07:58 +1100 > From: "G. White" <whiteghost....@gmail.com> > To: Wikimedia Australia Chapter <wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org> > Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Bushfire Wikipedia interview > Message-ID: > < > camrpczwjw3vof4yu8-wm6muxmtnewkdjeab+wmz55adaxc2...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > I heard that comment on radio and immediately added a balancing ref to a > scientific opinion< > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?shva=1#label/The+Conversation/141dca106db92c85 > >n > that was published in *The Conversation* (an online journal of expert views > in easy-to-understand language, or as they put it "academic excellence, > journalistic flair"). This was followed by a ref to a more comprehensive > report. Then a little while later a section on climate change was added. > > I don't think that the demographics of WP are relevant here. The points to > make about this, I think, are these: > > - the politician using WP the way he did only referred to the first lead > paragraph without reading or noting the following summary qualifiers that > show the complexity of the matter. > - WP provides this this complexity if you pay attention to it and read it > properly; > - the ongoing improvements show the continuous updating; > - the usefulness is being able to find easily, for example, BOTH an easy to > read scientific view AND a detailed report. A good reader service, really. > > Whiteghost.ink > > > > > On 25 October 2013 09:52, Kerry Raymond <kerry.raym...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Younger editors are more likely to be defending against vandalism than > > adding content (as a gross generalization) > > > > Sent from my iPad > > > > On 25/10/2013, at 9:49 AM, Kerry Raymond <kerry.raym...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > I think that's a largely anecdotal depiction of WP editors. The 2011 > > survey showed average age of editors was 31 but that older editors made > > more contributions than younger ones. The survey showed about 90% male. > It > > showed above average education levels and did not ask if they were > > interested in military history (although I agree with you that military > > history does seem to be well-covered in WP, but then so are episodes of > > Seinfeld). I don't recall if it asked about location or languages > spoken. I > > do recall another study that concluded in the "western" English-speaking > > nations, wikipedia editor numbers are broadly proportional to the general > > population, so given a lot of people live in West Coast USA, one would > > expect a lot of West Coast USA editors commensurately. > > > > Sent from my iPad > > > > On 25/10/2013, at 9:27 AM, Leigh Blackall <leighblack...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > While I wouldn't advise mentioning it in a media interview, if there were > > someway to remind people that Wikipedia is ultimately political, and > deeper > > analysis of the edit history and userbase reveals this wonderfully. If > you > > did venture into this topic Liam, you might point to the profile that the > > stats for English WP paint... What were they: young adult male from the > > West Coast USA, educated, interested in military history, English as a > > primary or only language... If opportunity presented, you might point out > > that this self consciousness is part of a larger openness in the > Wikimedia > > projects, something quite unique for large institutions. I guess it's a > > complicated way of reinforcing the advice to "check sources". > > On 25/10/2013 9:11 AM, "Kerry Raymond" <kerry.raym...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> One could also comment that the citations added in the climate change > >> section are to major scientific organisations in Australia and > >> internationally. > >> > >> Sent from my iPad > >> > >> On 25/10/2013, at 9:07 AM, Kerry Raymond <kerry.raym...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> The article has had a lot of edits in the past week and the climate > >> change section looks like it has been added after the Greg Hunt story. I > >> note a few familiar usernames in the edit history as well as IPs. some > >> reverting has occurred. > >> > >> How to phrase it ... Hmm ... I think a key point is that WP is a living > >> encyclopedia and events (being both the current bush fires themselves > and > >> the Greg Hunt statement) focus attention onto those parts of WP, which > >> results in them being updated and improved. In that regard some recent > >> edits have added information about the relationship between climate > change > >> and bush fires including citations. WP's role is not to tell people > whether > >> or not to believe in climate change but to present the best quality > summary > >> of factual information (with citations for people who want to dig > deeper) > >> and let people make up their own minds. Greg Hunt has made up his mind > in > >> one way, others may come to different conclusions. We are delighted that > >> Greg Hunt regards WP as an authoritative source but we would urge all > >> readers to read the cited material if they need a detailed knowledge of > a > >> topic on which to make important decisions. > >> > >> Sent from my iPad > >> > >> On 25/10/2013, at 8:43 AM, Liam Wyatt <liamwy...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Good morning :-) > >> > >> I've just been called by the producer for ABC702 morning show (presenter > >> is Linda Mottram) and asked to talk on radio sometime between 10 and > 10:30 > >> about Wikipedia's errors, how we improve the contet etc, etc, - in the > >> context of the recent bushfire / Greg Hunt story in the media. > >> > >> I can obviously talk about how we get better and that we don't pretend > to > >> be perfect and that we encourage people to check the footnote and make > >> their own assessment... But can someone please advise on the best way to > >> phrase how the specific article [[Bushfires in Australia]] appeared last > >> week and what has changed? I see there is a "climate change" section - > was > >> that already there a few days ago? (I can check the history when I get > to > >> the office, on my mobile at the moment, wanted to write to you straight > >> away). > >> > >> Any advice, ideas? I recall there being a userspace proposal on the > >> chapter wiki - can someone point me to that again and advise if you > think > >> it's appropriate for me to try to quote? > >> > >> Sincerely, > >> -Liam > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> wittylama.com > >> Peace, love & metadata > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> wittylama.com > >> Peace, love & metadata > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Wikimediaau-l mailing list > >> Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Wikimediaau-l mailing list > >> Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimediaau-l mailing list > > Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaau-l/attachments/20131025/09996439/attachment.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimediaau-l mailing list > Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l > > > End of Wikimediaau-l Digest, Vol 85, Issue 29 > ********************************************* >
_______________________________________________ Wikimediaau-l mailing list Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
