All Things in Moderation, Including Wikis

A cluster of news items last week suggests a phenomenon worth keeping an eye on: The Rise of the Moderated Wiki.

Jimmy Wales, founder of the 8 trillion ton gorilla Wikipedia, has proposed that edits to certain entries to the user-generated encyclopedia be approved by “someone trustworthy.” This follows incidents in which Democratic senators Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd, both in failing health, were proclaimed dead for a brief time on their Wikipedia entries.

Encyclopedia Britannica, which has stood firm against the tide of user-generated content with its flagship pulp-and-petrol encyclopedia, is preparing to accept edits from users to its online edition. These changes will be approved [or not] by Britannica’s paid experts, with a goal of 20-minute [!] turnaround time. [Oddly, this news has been thinly reported, mostly in the Australian and international press and not stated where I could find it on the EB site, so--ironically!--I can't vouch for too much of this.]

Meantime, the Washington Post Co. has launched WhoRunsGov.com, a wiki that collects profiles of members of the incoming Obama Administration. Currently profiles are authored by paid writers, but the company says it will open up to user-generated contributions later in the year. These contributions will be vetted by the paid staff members, however.

So what’s this mean? From where I sit, it says that the 2.Utopian ideals that gave the world Wikipedia–that leaderless crowds can self-organize and -police to create a more perfect compendium of knowledge than a group of paid experts–does not hold up in the harsh light of reality.

Woot, I say, woot!

Why am I gleeful? “Web 2.0,” to use the icky shorthand, can’t find its real place in the world until the grandiose fancy that well-informed judgment and hard-earned expertise doesn’t add value to user generated content is flushed away.

Predictably, the Wikipedia community has gone guano over Wales’ proposal that edits receive some level of moderation. It didn’t take long, in fact, for one of the disputants in the online spatterfest to play the Hitler card, a well-known marker of intellectual desperation. [To be fair, the leader of the National Socialists is used as an example to illustrate a legitimate point, but the stain remains.]

Yes, it’s tough to figure out how to balance the contributions of the People and the Elites. [See any chapter of the seminal Jefferson vs. Hamilton drama for details].

But frankly is strikes me as much more productive to engage the conversation of how to balance the two rather than whether to.

Have your doubts? I invite you to check out the Wikipedia entry for blowfish. Without my prompting, a couple of years ago one of my boys inserted a small but comical error into the entry. There it remains.

I am very proud.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Addendum, 10:36 a.m. Today comes word, per TechCrunch, that Jimmy Wales has launched Wikianswers. Says Wales: “Wikianswers uses the unique characteristics of a wiki to form the very best answer to any question.”

Sample question on the site this a.m.: How can a 12-year-old-boy burn fat?

Wikianswer:

How to burn fat everyone knows, it is not a secret, or a difficult question. The problem is not fat, problem is how it appears.

It appears cause men eat more that he needs to. Learn to control body and mind, and after that you will not go to eat if you dont want to eat. In most case people eat when they do not want to, it is just a habbit. Knowing yourself give a difference to do only that you want to do, not that habbit wants.

A lot of things helps to understand yourself - such a Joga, Dzen and others. But if you want just to burn fat, eat proper food and run.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Mommy, make the mean man stop.