Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Wikipedia to Academics : Why the Cold Shoulder?
> Media Forums > News Worth Discussing
Newsfeed
Wikipedia to academics : Why the cold shoulder?

CBS News
Wikipedia may be the fifth most visited website in the world. But it still fails to muster much enthusiasm from academics willing to participate in this global collaborative editing cause. So it is that Wikipedia is now trying to find out why. …
thekohser
QUOTE(Newsfeed @ Tue 29th March 2011, 11:46am) *

Wikipedia to academics: Why the cold shoulder?

CBS News


Comment:

QUOTE

Gregory Kohs:

Leave it to the Wikimedia Foundation to conduct a study of "experts", but leave the research survey open to anyone (any idiot) in the world to complete, as many times as they care to. I wonder if this study will be conducted and paid for in the same irresponsible way that a recent study of financial donors was wired (no competitive bidding!) to the former employer of the Wikimedia staff member overseeing the project?

www.examiner.com/wiki-edits-in-national/wikimedia-foundation-wires-biased-study-of-donors

<facepalm>

JWSchmidt
QUOTE(Newsfeed @ Tue 29th March 2011, 8:46am) *

Wikipedia to academics : Why the cold shoulder?


Does the WMF employ anyone with experience in academia?

-John Schmidt
thekohser
QUOTE(JWSchmidt @ Tue 29th March 2011, 7:47pm) *

QUOTE(Newsfeed @ Tue 29th March 2011, 8:46am) *

Wikipedia to academics : Why the cold shoulder?


Does the WMF employ anyone with experience in academia?

-John Schmidt

I've asked this before, and they usually shoot back that the gigantic man, Jan-Bart de Vreede has some experience "developing education communities" for Kennisnet. Of course, he is a board trustee, not an employee.
Gruntled
QUOTE(Newsfeed @ Tue 29th March 2011, 4:46pm) *

But it still fails to muster much enthusiasm from academics willing to participate in this global collaborative editing cause.

Any academic worth his (or her) salt is either wondering why he doesn't have an article about him or has looked at the article and doesn't like it.
Eva Destruction
QUOTE(Gruntled @ Wed 30th March 2011, 12:35pm) *

Any academic worth his (or her) salt is either wondering why he doesn't have an article about him or has looked at the article and doesn't like it.

Or in your case, both.
Peter Damian
QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Wed 30th March 2011, 1:08pm) *

QUOTE(Gruntled @ Wed 30th March 2011, 12:35pm) *

Any academic worth his (or her) salt is either wondering why he doesn't have an article about him or has looked at the article and doesn't like it.

Or in your case, both.


? PM me if you want.
Somey
I just cannot understand why people, especially journalists, are so utterly brainless when it comes to this issue. Of course "academics" aren't going to contribute to Wikipedia! Wikipedia is trying to put them out of business, ruin their livelihoods, and take food off their tables! Giving aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war is treason, people - figure it out! bored.gif

I can understand why the WMF and its contractors would include such moronic questions in press releases, but the only reason I can think of for why journalists simply parrot these things in respectable news outlets is because the journalists themselves have been compromised, if not completely corrupted, by the nature of their own personal online activities.
Jon Awbrey
QUOTE(Somey @ Wed 30th March 2011, 3:45pm) *

I just cannot understand why people, especially journalists, are so utterly brainless when it comes to this issue. Of course “academics” aren't going to contribute to Wikipedia! Wikipedia is trying to put them out of business, ruin their livelihoods, and take food off their tables! Giving aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war is treason, people — figure it out! bored.gif

I can understand why the WMF and its contractors would include such moronic questions in press releases, but the only reason I can think of for why journalists simply parrot these things in respectable news outlets is because the journalists themselves have been compromised, if not completely corrupted, by the nature of their own personal online activities.


I should have thought that some of the older timers hereabouts would have figured out by now what a bunch of hooey all this guff about the Nøø Media actually is, but nooooo …

The Corporate Owned Media that e-ploys this “new and improved” breed of journalistes sans intégrité are nothing more or less than the shabbiest segments of the Old Media turned loose from all the controls that formerly held them at bay.

And the Corporate Owned Media recognize a kindred spirit in Wikimpedia when they see one — they are far too old to be fooled by the moronic hype that sucks the marks into playing the Wikimpediot game.

That is why they see it as such a humongous resource of dumb cluck workers, and why they keep trying to draw the dumber acadumb-asses into their carny tent.

Jon Image
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.