{"id":267,"date":"2005-12-16T15:35:51","date_gmt":"2005-12-16T19:35:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/longestnow\/2005\/12\/16\/authority-an-idea\/"},"modified":"2005-12-16T15:35:51","modified_gmt":"2005-12-16T19:35:51","slug":"authority-an-idea","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/longestnow\/2005\/12\/16\/authority-an-idea\/","title":{"rendered":"authority : an idea"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a name='a1162'><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Joho wrote recently about distributed authority, providing trusted<br \/>\nviews of Wikipedia content.&nbsp; An excerpt from my reply follows:<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 40px;\">Distributed authority &#8212; in the &#8216;stamp and seal&#8217;<br \/>\nsense &#8212; is not my idea.&nbsp; And what I would like to see happen with research groups has<br \/>\nbeen suggested by others before me; there is simply growing interest in<br \/>\nit now. I want to make it easy for people who already work on and<br \/>\nreview content in a field to do so in a way that directly improves<br \/>\nWikipedia. <\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 40px;\">At the moment, individual authors &#8216;adopt&#8217; certain articles and try<br \/>\nto keep them fresh and free of errors. And various organizations<br \/>\nmaintain their own internal knowledge-bases with content that overlaps<br \/>\na good deal with relevant Wikipedia articles<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 40px;\">Rather than trying to hack an authority system into MediaWiki, you<br \/>\ncan do something simpler to encourage both of the above : have groups<br \/>\nthat maintain their own small clusters of articles &#8212; 10 or 20 or 100<br \/>\n&#8212; on a local wiki, with its own portal page. Give them an easy way to<br \/>\noffer their work for merging with WP, without requiring them to all<br \/>\njoin the site. The edits they make are implicitly &#8216;approved&#8217; by them.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 40px;\">This is <i>not<\/i> a good verification method within WP, however<br \/>\nsoftware changes are required for that (and Seth&#8217;s suggestion is one<br \/>\nspecific path one might take). At the moment, Nature can link to<br \/>\nrevisions of 100 articles that they approve. But once you follow a link<br \/>\nthrough to a Nature-edited revision of [[DNA]], and follow a link to<br \/>\nanother WP article, you&#8217;ve already returned to the realm of public<br \/>\nediting. <\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 40px;\">The motivation for this is a few professors and talented writers who<br \/>\nbegan editing on WP, but commented that editing Wikipedia directly can<br \/>\nbe offensive and off-putting (they are readily offended by trolling,<br \/>\nand have no patience for even trivial wiki-lawyering).\n<\/p>\n<p>We&#8217;re making progress towards Wikipedia 1.0, slowly but surely; I<br \/>\nthink along the way we will improve both the default view of content<br \/>\nand the selection of optional views suggested above.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Joho wrote recently about distributed authority, providing trusted views of Wikipedia content.&nbsp; An excerpt from my reply follows: Distributed authority &#8212; in the &#8216;stamp and seal&#8217; sense &#8212; is not my idea.&nbsp; And what I would like to see happen with research groups has been suggested by others before me; there is simply growing interest [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":135,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[213],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-267","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-metrics"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/longestnow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/267","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/longestnow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/longestnow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/longestnow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/135"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/longestnow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=267"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/longestnow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/267\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/longestnow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=267"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/longestnow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=267"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/longestnow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=267"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}