It seems to me that the Wikipedia is an anarchist experiment. To work, all participants must constantly struggle to correct the contributions of all the others. More importantly, everyone must be _disciplined_, to avoid posting their points of view as the Truth. There must be a clear community of shared values. It looks to me as if these conditions aren't there at this time.
An alternative would be having greater editorial control, but that would be admitting that the anarchist experiment had failed.
On 8/6/05, Chuck0 <chuck at mutualaid.org> wrote:
> My ability to post anything to Wikipedia has been frozen until Sunday.
> Now it appears that some editors have to decided to further punish me
> for being harassed by nominating the page about me, and pages about
> projects I work on, for complete deletion from Wikipedia!
>
> If you support me and my work, please post something on the following
> page asking Wikipedia to retain pages:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Chuck_Munson
>
> Several people have posted comments that falsely claim that I use these
> pages for publicity. I *didn't* create these pages. It's also ridiculous
> for people to claim that I am "non-notable", as I have done plenty of
> things over the years which eventually netted me profiles in the New
> York Times, Washington Post, and the Kansas City Star. If I was
> interested in my own vanity and self-promotion, I could have added much
> more to the Wikipedia entry about me. Like a good librarian and humble
> guy, I've been waiting for a friend or comrade to add more content to
> the page about me. I can provide biographical information about my
> activities and accomplishments to anybody who wants to expand that
> Wikipedia entry.
>
> This is so fucking petty and stupid!
>
> Chuck
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
-- Jim Devine "An economist is a man [or woman] who states the obvious in terms of the incomprehensible." -- Alfred A. Knopf