User talk:Carbon-16/Avoid presenting Wikipedia as anything but an encyclopedia
I couldn't agree more. "Knowledge" is too broad a term. True, it includes the type of knowledge that has to do with things like science and culture and history. But the term knowledge also includes things like, for instance, where I should buy a certain product. I believe making this distinction clear to the new user is crucial to Wikipedia's success, for the reasons you have outlined. In fact, I would tend to take it a step further. Not only should it be made abundantly clear to the new user that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, but it should also be made abundantly clear exactly what an encyclopedia is. For instance, I grew up having an encyclopedia in my home. I have also read as many of Wikipedia's guidelines as I can. Yet as a new user I still struggle with the exact details of what is appropriate to include in Wikipedia and how it should be presented. I can only imagine how confusing it would be to someone who has never even seen an encyclopedia, especially if this person also lacks the extreme patience required to find and then study the guidelines and suggestions. Riick 05:47, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- It's something that has to be grappled with, to be sure. Do we want to remain this practically walled garden of contributors? Or do we open it up, remove policies, let the less technically challenged do their thing? The latter may seem like a good idea, but we have to consider a number of factors: the fact that the Internet is a hellhole, for one, and also that there are a lot of spammers and others looking to capitalize or POV-push on anything that comes along. WP isn't perfect, but I think the way it's been set up is much better than the alternative. -Wooty Woot? contribs 04:28, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Where's the rest of it?
The introduction is nice, but that's all I really see. I'd like to hear more on your rationale on why you support WP:N, since that's something I've been waffling back and forth over myself. Blast 21.04.07 0254 (UTC)