From a perusal of the extensive Wiki sites, and after reading the five pillars and also what Wikipedia is not, it seems very clear that sufficient encouragements toward scholarship and intellectual honesty are in place to channel contributors' excitement and energy correctly! It is also clear that the founders of Wikipedia have created a multitude of outlets for projects that fall outside of the scope of the main Wikipedia concept. For example, a sister project encompasses
media, news, a dictionary, quotes, text books, novels, a repository for full sources, a site (Wikieducator) devoted to producing open content, and, of all things, Wiki Travel! Creating alternate channels for ideas not strictly aligning with encyclopedic form is a critical piece of the puzzle for keeping entries and corrections on task!
I created an account, then corrected one word in the Church Wikipedia link...I felt very timid and was conscious of the potential backlash of correction or deletion that could occur...but since it was only one word, I thought that it might not be so harshly censored! I changed the word, 'teachings' to 'doctrines' that Christ taught. (teachings that He taught sounded repetitive!)
I think Wikipedia is a great forum for the beginnings of creating AGI-Artificial General Intelligence! ( A massively intelligent computer which has harnessed the 'wisdom of crowds'. )
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Using technology tools to increase learning and expand the mind...
About Me
- Linda B.
- Third year PhD student; serious/silly; spiritually motivated; Santa Marguerita a favorite spot; silver lining in life is my family.
Linda's Tunes
4 comments:
It's interesting that you chose to edit for style. I looked at my article from a fact-checking perspective. Since style is also important, I'm glad to know that there are editors like you out there. I guess this is one reason that multiple perspectives is so valuable.
you make an excellent point about the importance of providing those alternate outlets instead of just shutting down creation and contribution that falls outside the scope of the central project...an important idea to bear in mind for any grand collaborative undertaking.
I wonder how those alternate outlets came to be and what the process would be to propose another; so that the off-shoot could benefit from the credibility umbrella of wikipedia, yet still fulfill it's own unique purpose.
I'm also intrigued by that last concept you mentioned--any concise "articles" on the subject of Artificial General Intelligence you could suggest?
Sarajoy, I actually found an article on AGI on the Web, but I am in Texas at the moment and not at home to pull it out! I will try to let you know the URL on Mon. when I return!
"Creating alternate channels for ideas not strictly aligning with encyclopedic form is a critical piece of the puzzle for keeping entries and corrections on task!" This is something that no one else I've read this week has picked up on... An important strategy for keeping things you don't want in Wikipedia out of Wikipedia is to provide people with some place else to put them! Nice, nice commentary.
Post a Comment