But what's wrong with that?
A lot of people let that intimidate them.
OK, let's begin with the Colbert video.
Kasey notices that Wikipedia sometimes has a very high opinion of itself.
MattD wonders what Wikipedia considers "a source."
Jess jumped right in there and got into a revert fight.
Sheila wonders why WP is a little bit hard to use.
M. Fitz became a wiki-expert on Marlborough, CT. and Courtney worked on the Golden Girls. Lisa has been working on Rosa Ponselle. (I have a theory about why a lot of us tackle people articles.)
Kasey has neatly pinned down the issue of authority. But what does it mean to say somebody is not an expert.
Courtner A calls WP the window shopping of learning. She says it relies on -- sound familiar -- trust.
Greg decided to see what WP says about ...Trinity. He's read for wiki-haters tonight, he says.
I think Lisa will help him.
But Dan doesn't really buy the collaborative effort argument.
Jess found this, which says it's a guy thing:
Courtney A. found this which says it's even more of a guy/geek thing.
Jess says trolls are a problem. I love this thing she found about Nickelback. Lisa found the Jarre thing, which I had forgotten
Jess found this, a by no means exceptional example of the problem for Wikipedia and for people who NEED Wikipedia to work for them
Also from Jess, what happens when WP is NOT a good source -- and then pollutes the news stream.