[Cz-biology] Auto-created articles about genes

[Dr. S N Sarbadhikari]

Dear Larry,
I tend to agree with David. Whenever we need any specific information,
especially related to recent research activities, we try to retrieve
useful info from multiple resources (including WP where many pages do
provide a handful of very useful external links). Often PubMed alone may
not be sufficient. Therefore, if we preach "exclusivity" of "freely
available authentic info", it may repel the potential users/contributors
of CZ.
Active Editors in CZ can always ensure that dead wood is pruned and
saplings are adequately watered to make it far more authentic compared to
the same page in WP or elsewhere.
With warmest regards
Supten

> Larry, both projects have everything to gain if they share
> information. Good material being on both is a benefit to all users,
> who are the people we are doing this for.  Each project has its
> domain, but they widely overlap--as education does more generally.  As
> long as our material is not contaminated by the unauthoritativeness of
> Wikipedia editing, we have nothing more to ask.
>
> Both projects have everything to lose if participate is exclusive. If
> I were in a position of having to choose, and project A objected to
> project B also participating, and project B didn't mind project A, I
> would unhesitatingly and immediately go with project B. If they each
> insisted on exclusivity, I'd look for a third solution.
>
> We see here an example of a commercial organization recognizing that
> the diffusion of both its information and its ability to collect and
> correlate information in its subject is beneficial to the public in
> general, and particularly those interested in its general subject
> field.  They will benefit from the public relations, yes, but they
> will benefit even more from the growth of pubic awareness and general
> knowledge of molecular biology. They are not unique--many scientific
> businesses have done this all along, and science research and
> education is the richer for it.
>
> They show a broader perspective in this than the attitude that you
> have expressed.
>
> In terms of biological informatics, the material they will be
> providing has the highest possible standing. For them not to cooperate
> with us will harm our reputation, not theirs.
>
> David Goodman
>
> On 9/20/07, Larry Sanger <sanger at citizendium.org> wrote:
>> Thanks for this, Andrew.  My comments:
>>
>> > The WP bot trial period is done, so we
>> > expect to go into mass production mode there later this week.
>>
>> Again, I think that's a bad idea.  I would be forced to reconsider my
>> stance.
>>
>> > Although hiccups aren't unexpected, I hope to have at least >
>> --Larry