[Cz-biology] Auto-created articles about genes

[David Goodman]

The articles will develop differently, and in a way appropriate to
each project. Ours will be supplemented carefully by additional
information, and provide a vetted and sound academic source--though we
will have to think about the mechanics of handling so many articles in
our editorial process. Wikipedia will be supplemented irregularly and
erratically in their customary fashion, and may provide a way by which
those not working to our discipline can still contribute to an
encyclopedia.

It's as if we were both using census data as the foundation of
articles--they will go different and appropriate ways. There will be a
professionally edited encyclopedia and an amateur one. I think there
should be a place for amateurs and students to try contributing, and
wikipedia will always have a function here. The great advantage of
Citizendium is there will also be a more reliable reference. But they
should still be as good as they possibly can be. We're not
[monopolistic computer company of your choice]--progress is encouraged
by continuing more than one direction; the stronger they are they
stronger we will be. If nothing else, we will always be trying to show
that we are better.

I think everyone's perspective may need rethinking from time to time.
My intent was , yes, to say that there might be a trend in our
perspective might need some adjusting--this is  friendly input that
you ought to encourage--should we rather leave each other heading in
ways that might be mistaken?

On 9/21/07, Dr. S N Sarbadhikari <supten at amrita.edu> wrote:
> Dear Larry,
> We have come back to a very basic question related to the growth of CZ. As
> you have rightly pointed out, the initial pages may act as a "fork" but
> the onus is on us to make sure that the CZ pages get filled up quickly and
> correctly (with "gentle expert oversight" that's sadly lacking in WP). In
> other words, we have to urgently recruit "active" experts (and
> enthusiastic authors) who'd make sure that they can work with the academic
> freedom which will not be available in WP. In fact, in this particular
> case we can perhaps have a greater advantage than that we can achieve
> against some of the failry well written extant articles in WP. We must
> give it a try or later on may have to lament on losing out on a good
> opportunity. Perhaps David or others can further enlighten us on this
> issue. Even Andrew (without wearing the GNF hat) can give us some ideas.
> Of course, the final decision (whatever be it) must be a well-thought out,
> discussed, and majority one.
> With warmest regards
> Supten
>
> > That's fine, but again, I would appreciate actual answers to my
> arguments. I think the matter is rather complex.  I don't pretend to
> have the final word, of course, but I would like to see some
> acknowledgement of the difficulties involved in several issues, which I
> raised.  Here's another (but again, it is only one): if both WP and CZ
> *begin* with the same fairly
> > detailed and identical articles, then isn't this essentially a fork of what
> > could be a unitary scientific community effort?  It would be one thing if I
> > were opposed to our sharing any articles at all about genetics,
> regardless of provenance.  But the entire strength of my objection rests
> on the fact that we are beginning with a large body of pre-made content,
> something you don't really seem to make much of.
> >
> > --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.
> >> Regards
> >> Supten
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cz-biology mailing list
> Cz-biology at mail.citizendium.org
> http://mail.citizendium.org/mailman/listinfo/cz-biology
>


-- 
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.