Larry Sanger essay - how to build a better Wikipedia

General discussion about Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects
Post Reply
User avatar
Auggie
Posts: 383
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 2:00 pm

Larry Sanger essay - how to build a better Wikipedia

Post by Auggie » Wed May 16, 2018 7:30 pm

https://thenextweb.com/contributors/201 ... wikipedia/
Larry Sanger wrote:Forget tens of thousands — why doesn’t Wikipedia have millions of regular voting contributors?
Why does Wikipedia have just one article on each topic? With the massive amount of traffic it gets today, in 2018, surely there could be many competing articles. There could be competition. Are Wikipedians afraid of competition?
Why aren’t Wikipedia articles, and versions of articles, rated by experts and by the general public? Why aren’t those ratings posted publicly? Doesn’t Wikipedia trust the general public to rate its content?
Why isn’t it much easier to contribute — and in lots of different ways? Surely we can make it much easier. Why do we have to use this shoddy, 1990s editorial interface?
And why is Wikipedia so insular, often driving away new contributors over minor issues and rarely polling its readers about what they want? One gets the sense that Wikipedians are writing for themselves, not for us.
He also says stuff about Everipedia and Greaterwiki and blockchain which I found too wordy and uninteresting to really follow. But I'd like to hear everyone's take.

Wikipediocracy has a thread on this but you never know if it will be locked.

Also Larry agrees with me about deletionism being a problem. He's an inclusionist.

Paul Bedson
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2018 12:13 am

Re: Larry Sanger essay - how to build a better Wikipedia

Post by Paul Bedson » Sat Jul 21, 2018 11:24 am

Hi Auggie and thank you for posting the benefits of Everipedia here so I don't have to sell it too much ;)

I wholeheartedly agree with you and Larry regarding inclusionism. Larry envisions a world where a much higher % of people could edit an encyclopedia easily about anything they know, in a more pleasant, nurturing, learning environment compared to what we have now. Before all Wikipedia's rules were written, Larry used to say "Don't worry if you mess up" and I like that as a philosophy. For a community to work, we all have to help each other out.

I discussed the suggestion of having multiple articles from multiple perspectives on a topic and it seems possible, just bracket your viewpoint after the article name. I feel one of English Wikipedia's dire failings is limiting its reliable sources to Western Press, it has basically become Western Press and an online encycopedia isn't supposed to be that, certainly not a neutral one.

Renée Bagslint
Posts: 288
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2017 1:43 pm

Re: Larry Sanger essay - how to build a better Wikipedia

Post by Renée Bagslint » Sun Jul 22, 2018 7:03 am

Paul Bedson wrote:
Sat Jul 21, 2018 11:24 am
I discussed the suggestion of having multiple articles from multiple perspectives on a topic and it seems possible, just bracket your viewpoint after the article name. I feel one of English Wikipedia's dire failings is limiting its reliable sources to Western Press, it has basically become Western Press and an online encycopedia isn't supposed to be that, certainly not a neutral one.
Wikipedia has got at least some articles sourced to the peer-reviewed academic literature and books written by known scholars published by university presses. Some of its articles are even written by acknowledged experts. I'm surprised you would forget to mention those. Is it possible that your view point on certain matters differs from that of the academic consensus?

I suppose these multiple perspectives include people promoting the notion that you can cure cancer by buying their really expensive vitamin supplements? What viewpoint should they put in brackets? "Cycnical exploiters of the desperate"? Oh yes, and the people who claim the Holocaust never happened? "Evil Nazi scum"? Or the people who claim that the world is run by shape-shifting lizards? "Deranged obsessives"? Yes, that works.

Paul Bedson
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2018 12:13 am

Re: Larry Sanger essay - how to build a better Wikipedia

Post by Paul Bedson » Sun Jul 22, 2018 3:17 pm

Renée Bagslint wrote:
Sun Jul 22, 2018 7:03 am
I'm surprised you would forget to mention those. Is it possible that your view point on certain matters differs from that of the academic consensus?
I wasn't really talking about academic consensus, although it would be valid where there is no or disputed consensus. I was more implying that Russians have different viewpoints to Americans, for instance, which is an area where English language Wikipedia is certainly not neutral from a global perspective. In conflict areas, two countries and their populations are likely to have radically divergent consensus on issues and that should be be catered for in an unbiased online encyclopedia.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest