4 ms·

> Before the advent of the internet this stuff wouldn’t be worth the paper it is published on. Are you seriously suggesting that before the internet no one pub

> Before the advent of the internet this stuff wouldn’t be worth the paper it is published on. Are you seriously suggesting that before the internet no one published or wrote about highly niche or uninteresting subjects? That you couldn't find mundane facts from history or nature written down somewhere? > Edit: what would be really cool is if I could leave a note on a page saying "hey, I visited this page and I'm looking to connect with other people interested in the Peruvian Foovius Barivius Moth"... ping me No, that wouldn't be cool at all. What we'd then have is a social network of people competing for some kind of points or popularity, or to prove who was the most expert or most interested in the subject. And we would see the quality of the articles degrade, and suddenly no one wants to work on the unpopular stuff. And people like you would be left wondering, "gee, why is it no one wants to write unpopular articles for this encyclopedia?"

xhkkffbf 3y ago
Exactly. What does this person think the Wikipedia articles are based upon? There's supposed to be a real source!
- ethbr1 3y ago
  Wikipedia's origination was almost 100% self-reported, uncited facts. The standards came much later.
TheFreim 3y ago
> No, that wouldn't be cool at all. It also already exists, but in a better form. If you find something is interesting, write about it. Then to connect with others you can find others who have written or researched it and then write them a letter/email/message. They will likely not be an island and you can get connected to a group of people who are genuinely interested in a subject without the degenerative downsides of a social media platform.
chadash 3y ago
> Are you seriously suggesting that before the internet no one published or wrote about highly niche or uninteresting subjects? That you couldn't find mundane facts from history or nature written down somewhere? Yes and no. I'm suggesting that before Wikipedia, no encyclopedia could have published an article about Jack Wade, Alaska, an incorporated community of probably < 100 people (I picked this place somewhat randomly off of google maps). If you put even one sentence about every town similar to that in an encyclopedia, you'd have an encyclopedia set that no one would be able to afford. > What we'd then have is a social network of people competing for some kind of points or popularity, or to prove who was the most expert or most interested in the subject. This really depends. For example, maybe I'm an American with a grandparent from Volosianka, Lviv Oblast, Ukraine (again, I picked this semi-randomly). Population is about 1500 today. There's probably a handful of people in the world who speak English and who have a particular interest in that town. Maybe my grandpa is from there and i'm looking to learn more about his life and i'd love to chat with someone else who knows more about the place. I think that there are a lot of articles on the long tail of wikipedia where there's probably only a few people in the world who care about the topic and if I'm one of them, I'd be interested in meeting with others. Obviously, there's plenty of topics where this isn't the case. I don't know how you'd implement this feature, because I don't think you want to turn wikipedia into a meeting room for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict [1]. But for these very very niche things, it could serve as an interesting meeting place. [1] In other words, I am stating a problem here... not a solution
- Symbiote 3y ago
  Prior to the Web, the place name would have been listed in a gazetteer (of Alaska, probably) with a small description. The moth would be described in the original scientific publication (from when it was first discovered) and then in books listing the Moths of Peru etc.

xhkkffbf 3y ago

Exactly. What does this person think the Wikipedia articles are based upon? There's supposed to be a real source!

ethbr1 3y ago
Wikipedia's origination was almost 100% self-reported, uncited facts. The standards came much later.

TheFreim 3y ago

> No, that wouldn't be cool at all. It also already exists, but in a better form. If you find something is interesting, write about it. Then to connect with others you can find others who have written or researched it and then write them a letter/email/message. They will likely not be an island and you can get connected to a group of people who are genuinely interested in a subject without the degenerative downsides of a social media platform.

chadash 3y ago

> Are you seriously suggesting that before the internet no one published or wrote about highly niche or uninteresting subjects? That you couldn't find mundane facts from history or nature written down somewhere? Yes and no. I'm suggesting that before Wikipedia, no encyclopedia could have published an article about Jack Wade, Alaska, an incorporated community of probably < 100 people (I picked this place somewhat randomly off of google maps). If you put even one sentence about every town similar to that in an encyclopedia, you'd have an encyclopedia set that no one would be able to afford. > What we'd then have is a social network of people competing for some kind of points or popularity, or to prove who was the most expert or most interested in the subject. This really depends. For example, maybe I'm an American with a grandparent from Volosianka, Lviv Oblast, Ukraine (again, I picked this semi-randomly). Population is about 1500 today. There's probably a handful of people in the world who speak English and who have a particular interest in that town. Maybe my grandpa is from there and i'm looking to learn more about his life and i'd love to chat with someone else who knows more about the place. I think that there are a lot of articles on the long tail of wikipedia where there's probably only a few people in the world who care about the topic and if I'm one of them, I'd be interested in meeting with others. Obviously, there's plenty of topics where this isn't the case. I don't know how you'd implement this feature, because I don't think you want to turn wikipedia into a meeting room for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict [1]. But for these very very niche things, it could serve as an interesting meeting place. [1] In other words, I am stating a problem here... not a solution

Symbiote 3y ago
Prior to the Web, the place name would have been listed in a gazetteer (of Alaska, probably) with a small description. The moth would be described in the original scientific publication (from when it was first discovered) and then in books listing the Moths of Peru etc.