|
The beauty of Wikipedia, I've found, is that there's usually only one axe-grinder per subject and so many others who are on the right side like yourself. There's no need to fix it all one's-self. Somebody will get to it, sooner or later. -- Paul Drye |
|
The beauty of Wikipedia, I've found, is that there's usually only one axe-grinder per subject and so many others who are on the right side like yourself. There's no need to fix it all one's-self. Somebody will get to it, sooner or later. -- Paul Drye I suspect what would help improve such situations the best would be to provide mechanisms which encourage good scholarship by, for example, making it easier to provide references, etc. That way if work was supported by references, the entry would reflect that. Then it would be easy for anyone to see who was contributing supportable content and who wasn't. And we wouldn't have to make other rules or strict "this is a good article" policies or call people axe-grinders, etc.--they'd be self-identifying. I hope you're not too frustrated. Giving up for a while on problem areas isn't so bad. I recommend keeping a record of versions of articles that you like, though, since the Revisions history is so brief. BTW, you do great work. And Mr. Drye's Portland Vase article is very nice. --TheCunctator |
![[Home]](wikipedia.png)