[Phys-L] Re: We can trust Wikipedia

["Britton, Chuck" <britton@NCSSM.EDU>]

I, too, find the wikipedia to be a good science intro for 'the masses=
'.
The 'behind-the-scenes' work that controls unbridled 'corrections' (a=
lso known as 'flames') is interesting.
Each article DOES have a 'manager' who oversees the process. Controve=
rsial topics come with warnings as to 'neutrality' of Point of View.

Such entries have a 'Talk Page' where dedicated folk can rant/rave/qu=
ibble etc.

i.e. Cold Fusion - lots of technical quibbling in addition to the que=
stions of 'pseudo-science' etc.

It is a facinating concept (Wikipedia) that Nature has studied in an =
peer-reviewed manner.
I suspect that it will live long and prosper as long as controversies=
 can be 'controlled'.
e.g. No updates are 'allowed' on Isreal/Palestine topics.

            Control versus Freedom
            Destiny versus FreeWill
            Preserving the Past While Building the Future


   yada, yada, yada

(If I were a judge - I would want to know if the cited article came w=
ith any baggage. Then I, the Judge, would judge the baggage)

=46rom: Forum for Physics Educators on behalf of Leigh Palmer
Sent: Mon 12/19/2005 2:04 AM
To: PHYS-L@LISTS.NAU.EDU
Subject: Re: We can trust Wikipedia
=20
I am currently involved in a lawsuit against the City of Burnaby in
the Supreme Court of British Columbia. On Friday I introduced an
affidavit of an acoustics expert who cited Wikipedia as authority.
The article cited has the advantages of being correct and of being
readily accessible, should the judge wish to consult it (although it
is printed out for him anyway). In this case a basic acoustics text
would be useless; the gap between even a fine legal mind and a
technical text is just too great to bridge in the time allotted to
his deliberations.

I expect a judgment in mid January.

Leigh

On 16-Dec-05 Bernard Cleyet wrote:

> I think it's because the trolls haven't attacked it *, and it's sel=
f
> correcting.  e.g. if one thinks it's in error, make the correction =
and
> see what happens.
>
> * yet, I hope this post isn't a mistake.
>
>
> http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7070/full/438900a.html
>
> bc, who thanks Sam, again
_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu
https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l