66:
73:
93:
204:
53:
83:
103:
63:
113:
178:
In the end, Terdiman allows for a reasonably positive outlook, saying that in time
Knowledge "probably will be seen as on par with the Britannicas of the world." Of course, many Wikipedians see it as having surpassed Britannica long ago, but obviously some segments of the population are not willing
174:
In presenting the
Knowledge response to criticism, Terdiman offers both refutations from Wales and ways to address the problems. He devotes some attention to the plans to develop a frozen and "finished" version as Knowledge 1.0. Based on hints from Wales, he reports that a 1.0 version might not be
166:
Terdiman refers to Sanger, oddly enough, as a "former
Knowledge developer". In the ordinary sense of the word "developer", this might be reasonable, since Sanger helped to develop the Knowledge project and its policies at its inception. In fact, this might serve as a compromise title to solve the
310:
279:
175:
published this year, however. Not clearly stated in the article was what medium a
Knowledge 1.0 would be in, whether this meant a print issue as Wales originally conceived or simply a static version distributed on DVD or other form of computer data storage.
106:
76:
116:
221:
142:
directed more press attention to the question of how credible
Knowledge is as a reference. As efforts to devise new review mechanisms for Knowledge continue, the debate still retains a certain fascination for the media.
96:
33:
39:
248:
243:
238:
228:
86:
167:
question of whether Sanger qualifies as a "co-founder" of
Knowledge, since he refers to himself that way but Wales does not. Still, as Knowledge has actual
233:
258:
152:
263:
215:
171:, a concept one might assume Wired's readers are likely to understand, the choice seems odd, since this wasn't really the area Sanger worked in.
381:
253:
291:
195:
apparently found
Knowledge's coverage of the event so comprehensive that he referred to it as a "chapter" instead of an "article".
21:
357:
298:
56:
352:
347:
342:
151:
At the outset of his article, Terdiman picks up on the recent wave of discussion about
Knowledge's credibility (see
326:
146:
182:
337:
203:
188:
17:
135:
283:
155:). The first half recaps some of the existing debate, quoting such participants as Clay Shirky and
363:
8:
168:
159:. Once Sanger's criticisms are introduced, the remainder of the article is framed as
126:
192:
375:
156:
160:
139:
187:
Knowledge remains a popular and frequently cited resource on the
322:
Get the latest headlines on your user page – just add
296:If your comment has not appeared here, you can try
163:' response and plans for the future of Knowledge.
373:
34:Media still probing Knowledge credibility debate
191:. In a column on Sunday, Darren Green of the
124:
307:No comments yet. Yours could be the first!
299:
14:
374:
134:In an article published last Monday, "
382:Knowledge Signpost archives 2005-01
27:
202:
28:
393:
111:
101:
91:
81:
71:
61:
51:
292:add the page to your watchlist
13:
1:
136:Knowledge Faces Growing Pains
275:
189:2004 Indian Ocean earthquake
18:Knowledge:Knowledge Signpost
7:
179:to concede that point yet.
10:
398:
147:Two sides of the debate
207:
183:Elsewhere in the press
138:", Daniel Terdiman of
327:Signpost-subscription
206:
289:To follow comments,
169:software developers
284:Discuss this story
249:Arbitration report
208:
300:purging the cache
244:Country infoboxes
389:
366:
331:
325:
303:
301:
295:
282:
226:
218:
211:
129:
115:
114:
105:
104:
95:
94:
85:
84:
75:
74:
65:
64:
55:
54:
397:
396:
392:
391:
390:
388:
387:
386:
372:
371:
370:
369:
368:
367:
362:
360:
355:
350:
345:
340:
333:
329:
323:
319:
318:
313:
311:+ Add a comment
308:
305:
297:
290:
287:
286:
280:+ Add a comment
278:
274:
273:
272:
239:Writing contest
229:From the editor
219:
216:17 January 2005
214:
212:
209:
197:
193:Chicago Tribune
185:
149:
131:
130:
123:
122:
121:
112:
102:
92:
82:
72:
62:
52:
46:
43:
32:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
395:
385:
384:
361:
356:
351:
346:
341:
336:
335:
334:
321:
320:
317:
316:
315:
314:
309:
306:
288:
285:
277:
276:
271:
266:
261:
256:
251:
246:
241:
236:
231:
225:
213:
201:
200:
199:
198:
184:
181:
153:archived story
148:
145:
132:
120:
119:
109:
99:
89:
79:
69:
59:
48:
47:
44:
38:
37:
36:
35:
30:
29:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
394:
383:
380:
379:
377:
365:
359:
354:
349:
344:
339:
328:
312:
302:
293:
281:
270:
267:
265:
262:
260:
257:
255:
252:
250:
247:
245:
242:
240:
237:
235:
232:
230:
227:
223:
217:
210:In this issue
205:
196:
194:
190:
180:
176:
172:
170:
164:
162:
158:
154:
144:
141:
137:
128:
118:
110:
108:
100:
98:
90:
88:
80:
78:
70:
68:
60:
58:
50:
49:
41:
23:
19:
269:In the media
268:
234:Server order
222:all comments
186:
177:
173:
165:
157:Larry Sanger
150:
133:
127:Michael Snow
57:PDF download
31:In the media
364:Suggestions
259:Celebrities
161:Jimmy Wales
107:X (Twitter)
140:Wired News
45:Share this
40:Contribute
22:2005-01-17
358:Subscribe
376:Category
353:Newsroom
348:Archives
264:Features
97:Facebook
87:LinkedIn
77:Mastodon
20: |
117:Reddit
67:E-mail
343:About
16:<
338:Home
254:Fvw
125:By
42:—
378::
330:}}
324:{{
332:.
304:.
294:.
224:)
220:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
