[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       wikipedia-l
Subject:    Re: [Wikipedia-l] An idea
From:       Andrew Venier <avenier () venier ! net>
Date:       2005-06-01 20:49:52
Message-ID: 429E1F70.9080700 () venier ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

Fred Bauder wrote:

> Knowledge and the ability to communicate it are what matter.  
> Credentials are evidence of the possibility that the person is  
> familiar with knowledge regarding a topic and can communicate that  
> knowledge, but not proof in the absence of performance.

Saying that credentials are insufficient to establish one's suitability 
as an editor is a very different argument from saying that credentials 
must not be permitted to play any role in the editing process--which was 
the original point I was addressing.

I don't think there is any disagreement that knowledge and the ability 
to communicate it are key factors.  The issue seems to be how to 
establish expertise in a way that is widely accepted and trusted.

As someone making a living outside of the fields in which I have 
degrees, I am well aware that credentials are not a direct 
representation of a person's knowledge and abilities.

I just question the wisdom of investing the time, money, effort, 
attention, mindshare, etc. in a system for verifying credentials while 
at the same time holding that credentials are not at all meaningful to 
the project.

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]