[Foundation-l] Has Wikipedia changed since 2005?

[Andreas Kolbe]

> This suggests the problem is: how do you *get across to*
> someone that
> they're just ignorant, in a manner that is duplicable
> across the wiki,
> and do that without breaking our spectacular successes so
> far?


Well, one way is to make clear to our editors that we expect them to make a bit of an effort to research the existing scholarly literature. (And that they should do so first before arguing with people who have completed that step already.)

However, that idea does encounter resistance. I am reminded that I proposed as much once, a good few years ago. I started a talk page discussion, and we made some changes and additions (some of which are still in the guideline today). 

One change which didn't make it was the addition of this sentence: 

"A review of the existing scholarly literature should be the first step in starting work on an article." 

The way the sentence was edit-warred out of the guideline is quite funny, in hindsight. It was removed a day later, with the edit summary: 

"Rm sentence that runs counter to policy." 

Another editor put it back in, slightly changed, so it now said: 

"A review of the existing scholarly literature *is recommended before* starting work on an article."

Half an hour later, that was taken out as well, edit summary: 

"Asking the general public to become familiar with scholarly literature (which does not exist for all subjects) prior to editing places an unrealistic burden upon would-be editors. Where’s the policy?"

I added it one more time, and it was taken out again and described as "nonsense".

You get what you pay for.

Andreas