Re: [EWW] Edit Wikipedia Week

Christiano Moreschi ha scritto:
> This vulgar monstrosity got my blood boiling. Who the hell thought this one up? Clearly, not someone who
spends half their day fighting in the dirty, blood-bespattered trenches of the never-ending Wikipedia-wars.
>
> Look, the plain fact is that we don't want more people adding their own junk to the English Wikipedia. Out of
the 2 million articles there, under 5000 have got any sort of quality control tag attached to them (FA, GA),
and even those often have very severe problems. 5000 out of 2 million? Is that anything to be proud of? The
rest? God help us. Even ostensibly decent-looking articles simply fall apart when any sort of critical
scrutiny is applied to them - the version of [[Johann Adolph Hasse]] copied over in whole from 1911
Britannica may have looked quite nice, but Christ only knows how many goddamned lies it contained until I
rewrote the thing from scratch. Same with [[Gluck]], which I'm currently having to do exactly the same
with. More seriously, poke around in the history of [[Russi
 a]], a plausible-seeming piece of well-tuned nonsense, cobbled together from an ultra-nationalist
viewpoint from online encyclopaedias and newspapers, that absolutely falls in on itself when even
semi-expert eyes look at the beast. I could easily cite perhaps a couple of million - quite literally - more
examples of decent-looking Wikipedia articles that are, in fact, absolute crap. Wikipedia, the
encyclopaedia written by the rabble, isn't working. Hell, I haven't even got on to the user conduct
problems - trying to maintain control over enwiki isn't a question of helping the encyclopaedia along,
it's a question of riot control while dodging the shit flung at you from 3 sides. So what's the solution?
>   
Well, I guess apart from Jimbo and a bunch of people we all started 
editing Wikipedia because we heard about it somewhere.And I'm pretty 
sure quite a few of us would look back at our early edits and say "Uhm 
that was crap". And since, as you say, we have to deal with a lot of 
crap, maybe it's a good idea to have more manpower. Do you want to 
improve the entry about Gluck? Maybe it's a good idea to target some 
student of History of Music, or some music society. And if you look at 
the first edit of a random featured article, you have a good chance it 
was crap or maybe a very short stub. Target people you think are likely 
to make good contributions, and teach them how to edit, and we may end 
up with a better encyclopaedia. Scare people off, you'll get read of 
good contributors rather than vandals and trolls.

Cruccone

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l