"One (and not the most important) pieces of evidence for Wikipedia being in a failed state is precisely that it does not, by the community's own admission, constitute a reliable source "
You have made this argument more than once. That might be a piece of evidence seems both wrong and not relevant to the sense in which people here as saying WP has failed, which is as a welcoming, "safe" environment for contributors and would-be contributors. It is good policy to make sure that contributors reach out to other sources, even when one believes that Wikipedia is as reliable as the average tertiary source we allow as a reference. It prevents us from relying exclusively on what can easily turn out to be a very narrow set of points of view. Does/did the Encyclopedia Britanica cite other EB articles as references rather than include them as "see alsos"? On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 8:27 AM Mister Thrapostibongles < thrapostibong...@gmail.com> wrote: > Vito > > This rather tends to support my point. One (and not the most important) > pieces of evidence for Wikipedia being in a failed state is precisely that > it does not , by the community's own admission, constitute a reliable > source:whereas "Reputable tertiary sources > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:TERTIARY>, such as > introductory-level university textbooks, almanacs, and encyclopedias, may > be cited". So Wikipedia fails in its aim of being an encyclopaedia on one > of the most important tests one could imagine, namely reliability. And a > reason for that is its lack of effective content management policies and > mechanisms to put them into effect (in the old days we called that being an > editor, but that word on Wikipedia now is more or less a redundant synonym > for contributor). > > Now suppose that Wikipedia had effective editorial policies and processes > that allowed it to assume the status of a reliable source, just like the > encyclopaedia it aims to be. You say that even in that situation, it would > be easy to manipulate. On that assumption, how much easier it must be to > "trick" it today when it has no such effective policies and processes in > place! > > Thrapostibongles > > > -- Dennis C. During _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
