Date: 2006-09-23 06:22 pm (UTC)
It's annoying having to fight, though I find the problem often isn't that I doubt the other person's qualifications or expertise, rather it's issues such as how best to express the information, or whether something counts as unverifiable or original research. Though I guess many will be willing to argue when they don't fear the other person is a random 12 year old, and they can see what that person's qualifications are.

I would be curious to see what credentials are needed for the less academic subjects - what makes someone an expert of "goth" or "BDSM"?

Ultimately you have two competing concepts of "an article which can be contributed to by a large number of people" and "an author who wants to write on a subject matter without having to argue about it with other people". Perhaps your tree idea could be useful even for "experts", not just anonymous users, in that they are free to write their own version, leaving other people to do the debates of what should make it to the final article.

I've also come across http://www.scholarpedia.org - another one "written by experts", but each article seems to be written mostly by one author. (Also there appear to currently be very few articles, and when they call it "free", they only mean as in beer.)
(will be screened)
(will be screened if not validated)
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org

Profile

ciphergoth: (Default)
Paul Crowley

January 2025

S M T W T F S
   1234
5678 91011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jan. 5th, 2026 03:15 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios