[okfn-discuss] effort to improve "open science" article on Wikipedia... also see citizendium

Sat Sep 14 01:28:58 UTC 2013

On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Gene Shackman <eval_gene at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 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.

I do not agree that any of these are necessarily valid reasons to prefer
work outside of Wikipedia. Wikipedia has peer review, and the "more" here
is trying to say something about Wikipedia's inadequecy.

I don't see real-names as necessarily an issue even though I appreciate
that it is often beneficial, it makes no difference in terms of developing
the best definition and explanation of "Open Science" whether an editor
used their real name.

Your 3rd point is nothing more than FUD.

There are good reasons to publish outside Wikipedia. These are not among
them.

--
Aaron Wolf
wolftune.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-discuss/attachments/20130913/c87a1e39/attachment.html>