Comments on: Gene Wikiality http://spittoon.23andme.com/2008/07/30/gene-wikiality/ A receptacle for genetic knowledge. Fri, 20 Nov 2009 04:01:10 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: sjors http://spittoon.23andme.com/2008/07/30/gene-wikiality/comment-page-1/#comment-669 sjors Sat, 13 Sep 2008 09:41:11 +0000 http://spittoon.23andme.com/?p=661#comment-669 The thing about Wikipedia's reliability that most people don't seem to understand yet, is that it remembers *everything*. You just have to look beyond the most recent version of the page. If you have any reason to doubt the content, just look at older versions and at the discussion page. That is a very powerful indication of reliability, but it takes some skill to interpret. Of course, better tools are needed to process this type of information automatically. Hopefully these will include as much information about the authors, e.g. their other contributions (this is already being done) and their social network. Ultimately these tools should also look at the actual meaning of their changes and see the difference between fixing a spelling error or a defamatory comment. The thing about Wikipedia’s reliability that most people don’t seem to understand yet, is that it remembers *everything*. You just have to look beyond the most recent version of the page. If you have any reason to doubt the content, just look at older versions and at the discussion page. That is a very powerful indication of reliability, but it takes some skill to interpret.

Of course, better tools are needed to process this type of information automatically. Hopefully these will include as much information about the authors, e.g. their other contributions (this is already being done) and their social network. Ultimately these tools should also look at the actual meaning of their changes and see the difference between fixing a spelling error or a defamatory comment.

]]> By: ejain http://spittoon.23andme.com/2008/07/30/gene-wikiality/comment-page-1/#comment-503 ejain Fri, 01 Aug 2008 02:31:54 +0000 http://spittoon.23andme.com/?p=661#comment-503 Does "the majority’s decision" really have final say on Wikipedia, or is it the site admins who do? In fact one issue some scientists have with Wikipedia appears to be that their real-world authority doesn't translate into authority in Wikipedia. I believe Citizendium tries to address this to some extent. Piggy-backing on Wikipedia seems better than setting up yet another Wikipedia-like system that doesn't add much in terms of functionality and is moreover less likely to be as durable. I'm kind of surprised that the Wikipedia people don't object to such automated seeding, but apparently they don't. Would of course be nice to have wiki-like sites that are more suitable for sharing scientific data (better handling of data provenance and conflicting opinions etc), but talk is cheap... Does “the majority’s decision” really have final say on Wikipedia, or is it the site admins who do? In fact one issue some scientists have with Wikipedia appears to be that their real-world authority doesn’t translate into authority in Wikipedia. I believe Citizendium tries to address this to some extent.

Piggy-backing on Wikipedia seems better than setting up yet another Wikipedia-like system that doesn’t add much in terms of functionality and is moreover less likely to be as durable. I’m kind of surprised that the Wikipedia people don’t object to such automated seeding, but apparently they don’t.

Would of course be nice to have wiki-like sites that are more suitable for sharing scientific data (better handling of data provenance and conflicting opinions etc), but talk is cheap…

]]>