Our Love/Hate Relationship With Wikipedia

netbuzz points us to a somewhat snarky Washington Post article about the Wikipedians' work in upholding a minimum standard of "notability" for the collaborative encyclopedia. Here's his take on the Post's bemusement from a NetworkWorld blog: "The Washington Post this morning gets its snickers at the Wikipedians who do the best they can to apply the minimum 'notability' standards needed to keep the online encyclopedia's 1.5 million English entries relatively free of worthless junk. 'It's also safe to assume these are people with a lot of time on their hands,' the Post writer notes... These are people doing a truly thankless job... and they deserve a few thank-yous."

Re:The reasons for a notability requirement

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, for the record, I don't have a cat. You do now.

Re:The language nazi says:

[RAMMS+EIN]

Cmuse me?

Re:It's not thankless

[Kingrames]

Where can I nominate "Outstubborn" for the "new word of the year" award?

Re:To avoid Vandalism

[chad_r]

Wikipedia is the 1994 USENET in 2006.

And wikipedia moderation is the 1997 alt.config newsgroup.

Re:Wikipedia critics miss the point, or do they?

[wik]

Please don't take my name in vain.

Thanks.