Althouse: "We are no longer at the point that it is acceptable to throw things at the wall and see what sticks."

August 25, 2009

"We are no longer at the point that it is acceptable to throw things at the wall and see what sticks."

"There was a time probably when the community was more forgiving of things that were inaccurate or fudged in some fashion — whether simply misunderstood or an author had some ax to grind. There is less tolerance for that sort of problem now."

Wikipedia evolves.

9 comments:

Bissage said...: I have a somewhat different take on all this.

I think we are still at the point where it is acceptable to put things out on the back step and see if the cat licks it up.

At the very least, we are still at the point where it is acceptable to run things up the flag pole and see if anyone salutes it.; 8/25/09, 7:58 AM
rhhardin said...: Walls figure strongly in policy.

You could have your back to it, or see the handwriting on it, or be driven up it, or be off the wall.; 8/25/09, 8:17 AM
rhhardin said...: I favor the I'm rubber you're glue policy.; 8/25/09, 8:19 AM
traditionalguy said...: Perhaps like in the Universe, there is a Dark Matter that explains the lack of truth in the Wiki articles.; 8/25/09, 9:12 AM
Salamandyr said...: I have a sneaking suspicion this is actually going to lead to Wikipedia being less useful on controversial subjects than before, since information is now subject to the biases of a few editorial staff.

Part of the usefulness of Wikipedia was that it was a high content, low-trust medium. Since errors of fact rarely made it in the edition for long (and few wiki vandals truly had the imagination for intelligent vandalism), the information was fairly reliable, but it had no pretense of being a definitive source, unlike newspapers, news magazines, and many other data outlets, that are more unreliable, and less brazen about it.; 8/25/09, 10:19 AM
Original Mike said...: I've always considered Wikipedia pretty useless on cultural matters. This is a step in a good direction.

For science, engineering, etc., it rocks. I find it invaluable.; 8/25/09, 10:26 AM
Robert W. said...: And if the "approved" author(s) happen to be of a Far Left bent, then what?!?

P.S. If I were to write "Hard Left Wikipedia authors are ..." is that redundant?! :-); 8/25/09, 1:14 PM
BJM said...: Why does this remind me of "Four legs good, two legs bad"?; 8/25/09, 6:10 PM
paul a'barge said...: Wikipedia is untrustworthy.; 8/25/09, 6:11 PM