elearnspace

Times of transition create mixed messages: User-generated? Expert-reviewed? Open source? Proprietary? While we have been partly taught to think of developments and innovations in light of VHS/Beta-Max or presidential campaigns (i.e. clear winner, clear loser), in the development of wikipedia or open source software, I think this is a false conflict. But the winner/loser thinking still prevails, as exhibited by a recent article, Revenge of the Experts : “In short, the expert is back. The revival comes amid mounting demand for a more reliable, bankable Web. “People are beginning to recognize that the world is too dangerous a place for faulty information”".

…and in a slightly related vein:
The Battle for Wikipedia’s Soul: “But Wikipedia is facing an identity crisis as it is torn between two alternative futures. It can either strive to encompass every aspect of human knowledge, no matter how trivial; or it can adopt a more stringent editorial policy and ban articles on trivial subjects, in the hope that this will enhance its reputation as a trustworthy and credible reference source. These two conflicting visions are at the heart of a bitter struggle inside Wikipedia between “inclusionists”, who believe that applying strict editorial criteria will dampen contributors’ enthusiasm for the project, and “deletionists” who argue that Wikipedia should be more cautious and selective about its entries.”