返回列表 回复 发帖 免费斗地主赢30元充值卡

維基百科 十週年主題系列文

相关搜索: 英文字母, 文章, 博客, 故事
加入英文維基百科博客聯播的 Ziko's Blog ,日前開始推出「Decennial ABC」系列文章,從A開始,一個英文字母配一個故事,內容頗具可看性,不容維基愛好者錯過。

各文標題如下:
A as in advertisement  廣告   部分翻譯
B as in Balance            平衡   未翻譯
C as in Cooperations   合作   部分翻譯
D as in Deletions         刪除   部分翻譯
E as in Encyclopedia    百科全書  翻譯完成
F as in Free                 自由    翻譯完成
G as in Google                Google 部分翻譯
H as in Hagiography   聖徒傳記  
I as in Interwiki            跨wiki
J as in Jimbo               吉米威爾士
K as in Knowledge       知識
L as in LinksM as in Monopoly
N as in Neutrality        無偏向性的

我把他轉貼過來,順手譯出一些。
當然,我可能會譯錯許多意思,文章裡有許多地方我也不全懂。請大家跟帖回覆。
本論壇精華索引帖
http://rcu.5d6d.com/thread-840-1-1.html
Decennial ABC: A as in advertisement

Weren’t adverts traditionally what kept an encyclopedia running?
沒有廣告的傳統,讓百科全書維持運作?
Wikipedia was originally a private project hosted by Jimmy Wales, an internet entrepreneur. When the project became too expensive the idea of accepting advertisements as a source of income came up. Finally Wales decided to pass Wikipedia to the newly found Wikimedia Foundation. Donations make it possible to keep Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects the way as they are, without advertisements. The issue, nonetheless, is still hotly discussed at Wikipedia.


維基百科源自於由一位網路創投家,吉米威爾士所有的一個私人專案。當維持這個專案變得太過昂貴,使它考慮接受廣告以作為增加收入的來源。而後,威爾士決定透過維基百科成立一個全新的維基媒體基金會。對外捐募能夠使維基百科不靠廣告養活自己,且能夠養活姊妹計畫。儘管如此,這在維基百科仍是一個激辯的議題。

In the history of encyclopedias, it was not too unusual to inform the readers about nice things to buy. John Harris wrote in his Lexicon technicum (1704) about mechanical instruments produced by specific instrument makers – most of them were subscribers of his work. Harris did not see anything wrong in that, it was the same to him as quoting from books, of course the best books there were. Isn’t quoting a kind of recommendation as well? [1]


在百科全書的歷史中,不告訴讀者有何好東西可以敗,那太不尋常了。約翰哈理斯在其技術辭典(1704年)一書中提及機器的製造廠商,而那些廠商大多為他的訂戶。哈理斯並沒有理解當中有任何錯誤存在,那對他來說就如同引述書籍而已,當然那些他所引述的文獻是當時最好的書。-------??

Even in those times, the 18th century, there were lines that could be crossed. Dennis de Coetlogon used some treatises in his Universal history of the arts and sciences (1740s) to boast about his abilities as a doctor. At the end of the treatise ‘Chirurgery’ he mentions one of his inventions, a ‘vulnerary and styptic tincture’. His modern biographer, Jeff Loveland, calls him a ‘quack’ who mentions his tincture in several treatises and sees more and more diseases it cured. [2]


甚至在18世紀的那些時代裡,仍有一些事該被打叉。Dennis de Coetlogon 曾在他所著述的Universal history of the arts and sciences (1740年代)這本書當中,用一些論文誇耀自己的能力猶如一名醫生。在該論文的 Chirurgery 的結尾中,他提及他的壹個發明, ‘vulnerary and styptic tincture’。但他在現代傳記中,在傑夫拉夫蘭的筆下,他是一位「庸醫」,因為傑夫拉夫蘭看過後來更多提及他的論文以及他所治療的成果。


Later encyclopedias dropped that kind of business but went on with advertising for themselves. Encyclopedia Britannica in the 20th century spent much more on promotion than on improving content.[3] ‘Executives are ready to use any emotion that will help sell their product’, warned EB critic Harvey Einbinder, especially emotions potential buyers’ had for their children. He quoted from a 1961 advert: ‘How will they measure up against the kids next door?’ [4] This in spite of the fact that EB (and other encyclopedias, usually) is not written for children.


One can expect that the publisher of an encyclopedia praises his work in the preface. In the articles ‘Encyclopedia’ it is common to find at least a mention of the work one has in one’s hands. The last printed edition of the multi-volume Brockhaus-Enzyklopädie (2005/2006) uses the occasion for an indirect self-promotion.
There we read at the end of the article ‘Encyclopedia’ that ‘it must be assumed that the electronic encyclopedias will go on to establish themselves; next to them there will be a continuous interest in printed editions.’ The article also emphasizes that the high quality paper used for Brockhaus-Enzyklopädie will make the volumes endure for more than 400 years. [5]


任何人都可以預期百科全書的出版商會在序言讚美自己的勞動成果。

I couldn’t help thinking of an old sketch of the German humorist Loriot, about an interview with a salesman of nuclear bomb shelters. To reuse one of the questions: ‘Can’t you imagine that even happy consumers after such a long time are no longer content with their purchase?’
—-
[1] Jeff Loveland: An Alternative encyclopedia? Dennis de Coetlogon’s Universal history of arts and sciences (1745). Voltaire Foundation, Oxford 2010, p. 163.
[2] Jeff Loveland: An Alternative encyclopedia? Dennis de Coetlogon’s Universal history of arts and sciences (1745). Voltaire Foundation, Oxford 2010, pp. 157-159.
[3] Harvey Einbinder: The Myth of the Britannica. MacGibbon & Kee, London 1964 (reprint 1972), p. 269.
[4] Harvey Einbinder: The Myth of the Britannica. MacGibbon & Kee, London 1964 (reprint 1972), p. 320.


http://zikoblog.wordpress.com/2010/12/01/decennial-abc-a-as-in-advertisement/
作者:Ziko van Dijk


本論壇精華索引帖
http://rcu.5d6d.com/thread-840-1-1.html
Decennial ABC: B as in Balance


Is it still a requirement that an (online) encyclopedia has to be balanced?
必須維持平衡性,這對(線上)百科全書來說仍是一種要求?
By balance, critics of encyclopedias think of the content. If the publisher advertises a reference work of general interest he is supposed to deliver a balanced compendium on different subjects.
Many famous encyclopedias have been less balanced or universal as one might expect. Pliny’sNaturalis historia dealt with ‘cultural’ subjects as it did with ‘natural’ subjects, but obviously the bulk of the content was about the earth and its living beings, about crafts and agriculture. The visual arts found a place next to metallurgy and mineralogy.

In the 17th and 18th centuries, and even beyond, encyclopedias belonged usually to one of two groups:
  • ‘Dictionaries of the arts and sciences’ were occupied mainly with nature and crafts. Note that science then included also theology. Examples: Lexicon technicum(Harris), Cyclopaedia(Chambers), Deutsche Taschen Enzyklopädie (Hasse).
  • ‘Dictionaires historiques’ and ‘Konversationslexika’ had their focus on history, geography and biography. Examples: Grand dictionnaire historique (Moréri), Ersch-Gruber.

During the 18th century the two types started to mix, and encyclopedias became increasingly universal. Zedler’sUniversal-Lexicon (a huge work of 64 volumes) was the champion of this evolution. [1]

According to Ulrike Spree the general lexika in Germany of the early 19th century wanted to serve the development of a learned conversation, as a base for the upcoming public opinion. These lexikawere interested more in history and politics than science (in the modern sence), and had to be up-to-date. In Britain, it was the other way round. Encyclopaedia Britannica (EB) started in 1768 as a dictionary of the arts and sciences, only later the publishers added geography, history and so on. ‘Not the significance at a given time, but the importance of a subject by itself, had to be decisive for the inclusion of an article into the lexicon.’ Later in the supplements after 1824 there was much more attention to politics. [2]
It remained difficult for encyclopedias to keep an overview and maintain balance. Harvey Einbinder criticises how in the EB of 1958 the presidency of Calvin Coolidge is given more space than Franklin D. Roosevelt’s with his dramatic life, ‘a balance that reflects the EB’s haphazard editorial standards’. [3]

Sierpinski pyramid by Solkoll, public domain


Just recently, a German professor of lawcomplained in his vademecum for students that there is no balance in Wikipedia. ‘Homer Simpson’ (the cartoon character) has more lines than ‘Homer’ (the ancient author), and ‘Robbie Williams’ more than ‘Béla Bartók’:
As long as inclusionists want to collect as much information as possible also about obscure subjects (there is enough space for everything), while exclusionists want to keep up quality and relevance (not everything has to be mentioned in a lexicon), a unified policy will hardly be found. (Roland Schimmel) [4]
There exists also another kind of lack of balance: Jeff Loveland finds it striking how ambitious encyclopedias were at the beginning, and how much impatient and sloppy at the end. TakeEncyclopaedia Britannica, first edition. A-B delivers as much material as M-Z does. In the Universal history by Dennis de Coetlogon one-third of the text appeared under A-C. [5]
Because of a major difference, the readers of Wikipedia don’t have to bother much. When you bought a printed encyclopedia you had the right to ask for a good ‘balance’. But nobody buys Wikipedia, and the reader is happy when he finds enough about the subjects he is interested in. It doesn’t matter to him that other subjects are covered much better.
—–
Previously: A as in Advertisement
—–
[1] Jeff Loveland: An Alternative encyclopedia? Dennis de Coetlogon’s Universal history of arts and sciences (1745). Voltaire Foundation, Oxford 2010, pp. 7/8.
[2] Ulrike Spree: Das Streben nach Wissen. Eine vergleichende Gattungsgeschichte der populären Enzyklopädie in Deutschland und Großbritannien im 19. Jahrhundert, Niemeyer 2000, pp. 36/37.
[3] Harvey Einbinder: The Myth of the Britannica. MacGibbon & Kee, London 1964 (reprint 1972), p. 148.
[4] http://www.fh-frankfurt.de/de/.m ... kipedia_aktuell.pdf p. 10
[5] Jeff Loveland: An Alternative encyclopedia? Dennis de Coetlogon’s Universal history of arts and sciences (1745). Voltaire Foundation, Oxford 2010, pp. 88/89.
本論壇精華索引帖
http://rcu.5d6d.com/thread-840-1-1.html
Decennial ABC: C as in Cooperations

At the end of the 19th century, Encyclopaedia Britannica was in financial trouble. But thanks to a cooperation with the London Timesit was possible to reach a lot of new buyers by massive advertising. This worked well, but the reprinted content became increasingly dated. A journalist joked: ‘The Times is behind the Encyclopaedia, and the Encyclopaedia is behind the times.’ [1]

Among the many cooperations in the history of EB there was also the School Advancement Program in the 1950s. A school got a free set of Britannica Junior if fifteen sets were sold via the school. The EB company obtained names and addresses of parents from the school, and the company claimed that the school was subsidizing the purchase of a set. The Federal Trade Commission reacted with a Cease and Desist Order. [2]

Wikimedia Foundation in a few cases had a cooperation with a commercial enterprise in order to make some money, beyond the donations it essentially lives from. In 2009 it was made public that the Foundation signed an agreement with Orange. The telecom company paid for the Foundation’s support to improve incorporation of Wikimedia content into Orange products. [3] But in the end there were never much of these cooperations because the Foundation does not really have to offer something: the content itself is free, anyway.
Wikimedians use most commonly the expression ‘partnership’ to denote a cooperation with an institution that provides pictures. A notable early example is the 10,000 paintings (public domain) given by the German enterprise Directmedia in 2005. The American mineral dealer Robert Lavinsky helped with more than 50,000 pictures of minerals from his website. The biggest donation from a single institution are the 80,000 photographs by the German Federal Archives(Bundesarchiv), at the end of 2008.

In a different kind of cooperation, institutions like museums allow Wikimedians to visit them and take pictures by themselves. The initiative Wiki loves arts in the Netherlands collected in this way more than 4000 pictures (June 2009).
在一個不同類型的合作中,一些機構如博物館等,允許維基人造訪並自行拍照。Wiki loves arts 在荷蘭用這樣的方式收集了超過4000張照片。

Some institutions try to gain a special benefit from the partnership. Bundesarchiv, for example, uploaded versions of its photographs in low resolution. The idea is that a high resolution version (maybe for a poster) can be bought from Bundesarchiv. Unfortunately, according to Mathias Schindler from Wikimedia Deutschland, Bundesarchiv has no intention to free more pictures. It was somewhat unhappy about people who reused the pictures without full respect to the licence obligations.

一些機構嘗試從夥伴關係獲得特殊利益。舉例來說,德國聯邦檔案館上載的相片版本解析度很低。而該想法是從聯邦檔案館購買高解析度的版本(也許可作為一個海報)。但沒那麼幸運,跟據德國維基媒體的Mathias Schindler所言,聯邦檔案館無意釋出更多相片。有點令人不快的是,使用圖片的人們沒有完全遵守授權規定之義務。

There are still a lot of opportunities for Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects.  It is to hope that the Wikimedia Bookshelf Project in future will provide more material for people who would like to cooperate.

維基百科和其他的維基媒體計畫仍有許多機會。期盼維基媒體的 Bookshelf Project 能在未來提供更多的材料給有意合作的人們。
—–
Previously: A as in Advertisement, B as in Balance
—–
[1] Harvey Einbinder: The Myth of the Britannica. MacGibbon & Kee, London 1964 (reprint 1972), pp. 43-45.
[2] Harvey Einbinder: The Myth of the Britannica. MacGibbon & Kee, London 1964 (reprint 1972), p. 323.
[3] http://blog.wikimedia.org/blog/2 ... o-spread-knowledge/
本論壇精華索引帖
http://rcu.5d6d.com/thread-840-1-1.html
Decennial ABC: D as in Deletions


In Wikipedia, anyone can create a new article. Consequently, anyone can ask to have an article deleted. It seems obvious that there have been no article deletions in traditional encyclopedias, because such articles would not have been written at all.
在維基百科,任何人都能夠新建一篇文章。當然,任何人都能要求刪除一篇文章。很顯然地,在傳統的百科全書不會有文章被刪除,因為該被刪除的文章根本不會存在過。

Only a few medieval works pursued after the year 1500. The knowledge in them was dated, new knowledge was extracted from scientific experiments. It needed shortening and actualisation to make these works suitable for the renaissance readership. [1]

As the encyclopedias grew and became multi-volume in the 18th century, they could cover more and more subjects. But from edition to edition, encyclopedias did delete or shorten old articles if they no longer interested the audience. When an anonymous printer republished Dennis de Coetlogon’s Universal history in 1759, he reduced the 169 treaties to 132. Above all, treatises with theological subjects were eliminated. [2]


在18世紀,當百科全書變大且變成多卷的時候,百科能夠涵蓋更廣闊以及更細小的題材。但是當百科一版一版改版的時候,假若讀者對某些題材不再感到興致時,百科全書也會刪除或縮減舊的文章。

With regard to Wikipedia, many outsiders don’t understand why an online encyclopedia has to delete articles. Web space is cheap. But most of them can accept the explanation that an article costs a lot of work. According to Kurt Jansson, the German Wikipedia pioneer, the question about relevance is in fact the question: how much does this subject matter to us that we accept the work it will cause the following years. Many articles are not up-to-date.


而說到維基百科,許多外人無法理解為何一個線上的百科全書必須刪除文章。網站空間很便宜。但是他們之中多數能夠接受這個說法:一篇文章需要耗費很大的成本。According to Kurt Jansson ,一名德文維基百科的先驅人士,他認為這個問題面臨一個實情:維基百科接受多少分量的材料輸入,而它將影響接下來的數年。許多文章都沒有再更新了。

How will Wikipedia deal with article deletions in future? When article numbers rise and the community stays the same or shrinks, will notability criteria tighten? What is true for new articles, can also be applied to old articles.


維基百科未來將會如何處理文章的刪除? 當文章數量擴張而社群停滯或衰退時,會將關注度標準收緊嗎? 這對新文章來說是真實的,也同時適用老文章。
—–
Previously: A as in Advertisement, B as in Balance, C as in Cooperations
—–
[1] Robert Luff: Wissensvermittlung im europäischen Mittelalter. ‘Imago mundi’-Werke und ihre Prologe. Max Niemeyer Verlag, Tübingen 1999, p. 425.
[2] Jeff Loveland: An Alternative encyclopedia? Dennis de Coetlogon’s Universal history of arts and sciences (1745). Voltaire Foundation, Oxford 2010, p. 79.
本論壇精華索引帖
http://rcu.5d6d.com/thread-840-1-1.html
Decennial ABC: E as in Encyclopedia


Is Wikipedia an encyclopedia? 維基百科是一部百科全書嗎?
In her 2010 PhD thesis, Daniela Pscheida writes constantly about ‘the so-called online encyclopedia Wikipedia’ and ultimately explains why Wikipedia according to her is no encyclopedia. She thinks that Wikipedia misunderstood its own identity:

  • On the one hand, Wikipedia sees itself in the tradition of encyclopedias.
  • On the other hand, Wikipedia exceeds the limits of the genre encyclopedia by accepting new topics such as contemporary events.
Wikipedia to her is a database. [1]


在她2010年的博士論文中,Daniela Pscheida 寫道..........................................
她認為維基百科誤解了自己的身份。
* 一方面,維基百科將自己視為傳統的百科全書之列。
* 在另一方面,維基百科超越了百科全書學派,接納了全新的題材,例如維基百科可以寫當代的事件。
維基百科對她來說是一部資料庫。

Maybe Daniela Pscheida’s opinions relate to the fact that she describes Wikipedia quite well and extensively but (for any reason) did not notice our rule No Original Research. At the end, she even recommends that scholars establish new theories via Wikipedia, aside the traditional way of peer-review.
也許 Daniela Pscheida 描述維基百科的許多觀點非常好,貼近事實且全面,但是她忽略了我們的一項規則,「拒絕原創研究」。在文末,她還建議學者在傳統的同行評審之外,藉由維基百科來建立新的理論。


Whether Wikipedia is an encyclopedia or not, we can argue. About this last thing, we can’t. Sorry.
維基百科是否是一部百科全書,這我們可以討論。但關於最後一點,抱歉,我們不能接受。

Modern encyclopedias and our concept of an encyclopedia were shaped in the 18th century. Earlier, the notion and the subject already existed, but were not linked the way we tend to do nowadays. The ancient Greek term is of uncertain etymology. Paul Scalich’s Encyclopaedia of 1539 was the first reference work to have the word in its title. [2]
現代的百科全書以及我們對於百科全書的概念成形於18世紀。

Not only are there a lot of expressions for an encyclopedia, the content was very diverse and presented in different ways. Based on that, it is difficult to exclude a work from the list of encyclopedias if it does not match to what somebody has in mind.

An encyclopedia does not cover contemporary events and things? It does, this was the main intention of the original ‘Konversations-Lexika’, to capture the Zeitgeist and help the reader to participate in conversations about society and politics.
百科全書不包含當代事件題材?確實如此,這意涵主要來自於「會話辭典」,為了捕捉時代精神並協助讀者參與到關於社會與政治的對話。

Ulrike Spree wrote that people thinking about encyclopedias don’t have a list of criteria in mind, but prototypes. In the prefaces of their works, the authors or publishers file their work in the tradition of encyclopedias, using other encyclopedias as model or as counter-example. Wikipedia is not different.

Who was the biggest Wikipedia critic?誰是最大的維基百科評論者?


For example, it seems to be more common in Germany than in the English-speaking world that readers complain about the length of Wikipedia articles. According to them, an encyclopedia consists of rather short articles. This may relate to the fact that in the German-speaking world the most popular traditional encyclopedia was Brockhaus, a short-article-encyclopedia.
舉例來說,比起英語世界而言,德文版似乎更常見到讀者在抱怨維基百科文章的長度。根據他們的抱怨內容,一部百科全書(應)包含相當短的文章。這可能與一個事實有關,在德文世界裡,最廣為使用的百科全書是 Brockhaus ,一部簡短文章的百科全書。

In 2005, the German language Wikipedians had a discussion about footnotes, whether to use them in articles. Several of them said that footnotes are not used in an encyclopedia. Again, it depends on the historical model you follow.
在2005年,德文維基百科有過一次關於文章中該不該包含注的討論。他們之中的許多人認為,註腳不曾用於百科全書之中。

In 2007 German Stern magazine presented a close comparison of Brockhaus and Wikipedia, in which Wikipedia appeared to be the better encyclopedia, Klaus Holoch said that the Wikipedia principle is interesting. But Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia (‘Lexikon’), he claimed, because it is gratuitous and unchecked.

2007年德國Stern雜誌刊出一則維基百科與 Brockhaus百科的比較,維基百科相比之下更形出色,Klaus Holoch則稱維基百科的原理是有趣的。他主張維基百科不是一部百科全書,因為他是免費的(或譯無目的的),且內容是未經校對的。

Incidentally, Klaus Holoch was the chief sales representative of Brockhaus.

順帶一提,Klaus Holoch是Brockhaus百科全書的銷售代表。
—–
Previously: A as in Advertisement, B as in Balance, C as in Cooperations, D as in Deletions
—–
[1] Daniela Pscheida: Das Wikipedia-Universum. Wie das Internet unsere Wissenskultur verändert. transcript, Bielefeld 2010, pp. 442-446.
[2] Ulrike Spree: Das Streben nach Wissen. Eine vergleichende Gattungsgeschichte der populären Enzyklopädie in Deutschland und Großbritannien im 19. Jahrhundert, Niemeyer 2000, p. 17/18.
本論壇精華索引帖
http://rcu.5d6d.com/thread-840-1-1.html
Decennial ABC: M as in Monopoly
http://zhwp.org/User:Waihorace
HW - 來自香港的維基人
Decennial ABC: F as in Free


The first and most profound misunderstandig people can have about Wikipedia comes from its subtitle: the free encyclopedia.

人們對於維基百科最首要以及最深刻的誤解,來自它的小標題:the free encyclopedia.

‘Free’ can mean practically everything. Joachim Gauck, the 2010 presidential candidate in Germany, speaks about the ‘freedom concept of the pubescent’ when someone believes that freedom means ‘I can do anything I want’. In fact, we frequently meet people who complain that ‘their’ article has been deleted, and they wonder how that can happen in a ‘free’ encyclopedia.


「Free」實際上意味著一切。 Joachim Gauck,2010年德國聯邦的總統候選人,他說道:當有人信仰自由是「只要我想做有甚麼不可以」的時候,自由的概念仍是一名青春期的少年。事實上,我們頻繁的接觸到人們的抱怨:「他們的」文章被刪除了,他們並不預期在一個「自由的」百科全書發生這樣的事。

In Wikipedia, ‘free’ relates to the concept of ‘free content‘, coming from the movement for ‘free and open source software’. Sometimes it is presented as an alternative to copyright; seen from the more European concept of Urheberrecht (rights of the author), it is more of an option. The author can allow that his work can be copied, spread and altered, and as it is the wish of the author, the courts take ‘free content’ serious.

在維基百科內,自由意指「自由內容」,此意源自於「自由暨開放源碼軟體」運動。有時候這代表版權的一種選擇:從歐洲版權所有的概念(作者的權利)觀之,它更代表選擇的一種。該作者能夠允許他的勞動成果被複製、散佈、再修改,並且一如作者期望的,派生作品也是自由內容。

In ancient times and the middle ages, immaterial rights where largely unknown. Someone could possess a book, and it was a crime to steal that book, but usually nobody cared if another one copied the book. Especially in the case of an encyclopedia, the writers saw themselves as sedulous bees, as craftsmen and compilers, passing old and proven book knowledge to the next generations. [1]

在古代以及中世紀,無形的權利是被忽視的。某人可以具體地擁有一本書,而偷一本書是犯罪行為,但是沒有人會介意另一個人去複印那本書。尤其是百科全書,百科全書的作者視己如孜孜不倦辛勤工作的蜜蜂,又如工匠或編譯者,透過書籍將知識傳遞給下一代人。

Some essential things changed during the late middle ages and beyond. Knowledge could become dated because of experiments; the quantity of knowledge exploded and needed reduction to comprehensive summaries; authors claimed originality and were no longer too modest to publish under their own name. And, even it took a long time, the production of books became cheaper. In the middle ages, an encyclopedia existed usually in some hundred (hand written) copies, in the 18th century it were some thousand copies, and after that ten thousands or even more.

但在中世紀的晚期以及之後,一些事情發生本質上的變化。 由於實驗,知識可以過時;知識數量爆炸且需要將之刪減以成為統整性的結論;作者們宣稱原創且不再吝於以自己的名號出版。而且,經過很長一段時間,造冊的成本降低了。在中世紀,一部百科全書有上百份(手抄)副本,在18世紀達到上千份,而之後是數萬或者更多。

In the 19th century, it was no longer possible to write an encyclopedia by pure plagiarism, also thanks to modern copyright. Texts and pictures became ‘unfree’, as some of the activists for ‘free content’ might say. Information itself remained much more difficult to ‘protect’, everyone is free to say that Mount Everest is 8848 meters high and that Buenos Aires has 2.7 million inhabitants.


在19世紀,不可能再藉由純粹的抄寫而寫出一部百科全書,這要感謝現代的版權觀念。一些積極的自由內容運動份子也許會這麼宣稱,文字與圖片成為「不自由的」。資訊本身仍是難以「被保護」的,人人都可以自由地說聖母峰高8848公尺,而布宜諾斯艾利斯有270萬人。

Free content: Margarita Philosophica (1503)


Also for Wikipedians it is difficult to tell exactly what they are allowed and what not, or what is suitable to do. There are texts and pictures that became free because of old age, for example previous editions of Britannica and Meyer. The English and German language Wikipedians were not always enthusiast about e.g. Britannica articles of 1911 – it took a lot of time to make them a little bit up to date.

所以對於維基人來說,難以明確的說甚麼是允許的而甚麼不被允許,或甚麼事是適合的。現存許多文字與圖片已然成為自由的,因為它們夠老,舉例來說前幾版的大英百科和Meyer就是如此。但是英文、德文維基人不全然樂於接受1911年版的大英百科文章─ 因為要更新它的一點點內容就曠日廢時。

In summer 2009, the case of the London National Portrait Gallery (NPG) was hotly discussed. An American Wikipedian, Derrick Coetzee, took for about 3,300 pictures from the NPG’s website and uploaded them to Wikimedia Commons. The pictures were free because their age, but NPG complained at Wikimedia Foundation. NPG had paid more than a million pound to scan the pictures and wanted to make money with high-resolution versions (the pictures on the website were presented originally in a way that made downloading and copying difficult). In Britain it is possible that a database is protected by copyright, NPG said, but WMF answered that the comparison to a database does not work.

在2009年的夏天,人們熱烈討論倫敦國家肖像畫廊(NPG)的案例。一名美國維基人,Derrick Coetzee,從NPG的網站取得了大約3300幅圖片並將之上傳到維基共享網站。這些圖片因為年代久遠,它們是自由的,但是NPG仍向維基媒體基金會有所抱怨。NPG花費超過一百萬英鎊掃描了圖片並且打算藉由高解析度的圖片獲取收益(NPG網站上展示的圖片難以下載和複製)。NPG聲稱,在英國,一個資料庫有可能被版權所保護。但是維基媒體基金會則反對版權適用於該資料庫。

One year later, Wikipedian Liam Wyatt asked on his blog: ‘ Who would you least expect to attend GLAMWIKI-UK?’ Indeed: the head of rights & reproductions at the National Portrait Gallery, Mr. Tom Morgan. After Mr. Morgans presentation ‘Wikipedia and the National Portrait Gallery – A bad first date?’, Liam Wyatt had a nice conversation with him. Their disagreement on some legal principles remained, but Liam Wyatt described the atmosphere with a quote from a tv show: ‘You can happily question our methods, we do that all the time, but don’t question our motives’.


一年後,維基人 Liam Wyatt 在他的博客提到:在GLAMWIKI - UK 上誰是最意想不到的來客?倫敦國家肖像畫廊的權利代表人,湯姆摩根先生。在摩根先生展示了「維基百科與倫敦國家肖像畫廊 - 一個糟透的首次約會」簡報之後,Liam Wyatt 與他來一段愉快的對話。他們對於法律原則仍有一些歧異,但是 Liam Wyatt 引用電視脫口秀的一段話來描述當時的氣氛:‘You can happily question our methods, we do that all the time, but don’t question our motives’.

—–
Previously: A as in Advertisement, B as in Balance, C as in Cooperations, D as in Deletions,E as in Encyclopedia
—–
[1] Robert Luff: Wissensvermittlung im europäischen Mittelalter. ‘Imago mundi’-Werke und ihre Prologe. Max Niemeyer Verlag, Tübingen 1999, p. 414.
本論壇精華索引帖
http://rcu.5d6d.com/thread-840-1-1.html
Decennial ABC: G as in Google


How do people come to know that there is an encyclopedia?
In previous times, people (maybe) learned at school that there exist encyclopedias, what they are good for and where to find them. The publishers on their hand tried to reach as many people and also convince them to buy an encyclopedia.


人們是如何知道那兒有一部百科全書?
在從前的時代,人們(也許)從學校學得百科全書位於何處,人們知道百科的益處並了解如何找到百科全書。出版商試圖讓儘可能更多的人接觸到百科,並說服人們去敗。

How appalling that this is totally history by now, because of two internet giants which rose at the eve of the new millennium. Nowadays, pupils (and adults alike) open their web browser and often find Google pre-installed as the start page. When they ‘google’ for something, a Wikipedia article is almost always among the first five search hits. It is absolutely unnecessary that a teacher tells them ‘where to find the encyclopedia’. [1]

今日來看,這段歷史有了令人驚異的發展,肇因於網際網路的兩大巨頭在千禧年蓬勃發展。今日,人們開啟網路瀏覽器並時常將谷歌設作首頁。當人們 google 搜尋某字時,維基百科的條目幾乎總位在搜尋結果的前五條。 已全然不需要老師告訴他:如何能夠找到百科全書。

Andrew Lih in The Wikipedia Revolution recalls a case from April 2004, when antisemites had manipulated Google in a way that searches for ‘jew’ produced an antisemitic site at the top of the search. A site appears at the top if many other sites link to it. So internet activists asked people to link to another site, to beat the antisemites with their own weapon. The suitable site was Wikipedia because of its neutral point of view. [2]

Also Wikipedia itself became a victim of Google manipulation. It is legal and even legitimate to create a new site and use Wikipedia content there, so some people created Wikipedia ‘clones’ with adverts. Normally nobody would have looked at these clones, but some clone owners were capable enough to manipulate the Google search. Around 2005 there was a period when it was difficult to find the Wikipedia article among all those clones; after Google improved its PageRank, this problem became history too.


維基百科自身也成為谷歌操縱的受害者。 運用維基百科的內容創造一個新網站,是完全合法的,因此一些人建立了維基百科拷貝並掛上了廣告。通常沒有人要看那些拷貝版,但是拷貝版的擁有者有能力操縱Google搜尋結果。大約在2005年,已經很難在拷貝版之中找到維基百科文章;之後Google改善了 PageRank,這個問題已經成為歷史。

Some people even speak about a symbiosis between Google and Wikipedia, although it is not clear what the benefit for Google would be. On the contrary, Google is unhappy about the fact that for about one-third of the search hits go to Wikipedia articles – meaning, pages without (Google) adverts. So Google came up in 2008 with a knowledge platform of its own, Google Knol.


有人認為Google與維基百科是共生關係,雖然尚未釐清Google將從何獲取利益。相反的,Google 對於有三分之一的搜尋點擊是前往維基百科而感到不悅,意味著那些頁面沒有廣告。因此,Google在2008年自行成立了知識平臺,Google Knol。

And how do you find Google?


The media liked to present Knol as a Wikipedia killer that wants to avoid the flaws of Wikipedia. Knol wishes people to write under their real name, that they can own an article, are not bound to encyclopedic rules, and can make money per page views.

媒體喜歡將 Knol 形容是一個維基百科殺手,說它要想避免維基百科的缺失。Knol 期望人們以實名寫作,作者能夠擁有文章, 且不一定要遵循百科全書的原則,甚至能夠從閱覽人次賺錢。

Of course, Knol came into existence when there was already a strong competitor (Wikipedia) on the market. But the main reason for the very limited success of Knol is more inherent: Knol is just another one of many places for single authors to publish, without control by anyone. Nobody at Google checks whether the authors really are the experts and professors they claim to be.

想當然耳,Knol誕生後立即就在市場上面臨了維基百科這個強大的競爭者。但是 Knol 十分有限的成就其主要原因在於 Knol只是另一個各別作者發佈文章的地方,不由任一網民所控制。沒有人幫 Google 驗證在 Knol 上宣稱自己是專家或教授的人,其身分是否為真。

Anyhow, the intimate relationship between Google and Wikipedia will probably remain for a long time. A friend of mine once explained to me how he proceeds on the web. The retired archivist googles, and usually comes to Wikipedia, and then reads the article and maybe clicks on an internal link. And when he wants to look-up something else, he does not use the Wikipedia search (of which he doesn’t know at all) – he clicks the home button of his web browser and googles again.


無論如何,Google 與維基百科的親密關係將會再延續好一段時間。....................。當他想要尋找另一項東西,他不使用維基百科的搜尋功能(他根本不曉得)- 他按下網路瀏覽器上的首頁按鈕,並且再 google一次。

—-
Previously: A as in Advertisement, B as in Balance, C as in Cooperations, D as in Deletions,E as in Encyclopedia, F as in Free
—-
[1] Andrew Lih: The Wikipedia Revolution, Hyperion books, 2009, p. 115.
[2] Andrew Lih: The Wikipedia Revolution, Hyperion books, 2009, p. 115, pp. 202-204.
本論壇精華索引帖
http://rcu.5d6d.com/thread-840-1-1.html
Decennial ABC: H as in Hagiography


Who are greatest thinkers of history, according to Britannica?
A hagiography is a biographic text about a holy person, and typically the term refers to the vita of a Christian saint in the middle ages. In the modern context the term is polemic in nature, as nowadays famous people are admired but usually not considered holy. Instructional texts, and encyclopedias originated from schoolbooks, long presented historical persons as models for good behaviour, or for the opposite. Those black-white-descriptions did not have much room for differentiation, for a critical approach, or for impartiality. The immaculateness of the person was partially the reason for including her in the canon.


根據大英百科全書,誰是歷史上最偉大的思想家?
聖賢傳記是一種關於神聖人物的文本傳記,這個詞彙通常是中世紀的基督教所用。在現代的語境下,這個詞是帶有爭議性的,因為現代人說,有名氣的人物是令人欽佩的,但不是神聖的。在校園裡的教科書、百科全書之中,總是將歷史人物作為一個行為表率,或全然相反。如此非黑即白的陳述,沒有更多的空間作分別,以進行評述,或給予公正的評價。


Eventually, some very positive descriptions had more base motives. Dennis de Coetlogon (Universal history, 1740s) seemingly expected a reward when praising for example the religious commitment of Edward Howard in the article ‘Heraldry’, or when Anthony Browne, Viscount of Montagu, in ‘Nobility’ is called ‘that excellent nobleman’. [1]

A peticular problem in small linguistic communities: It is not always easy to obtain reliable sources for a biography, or a neutral person to write about some else. This seems to be the case with the article ”Cseh, Andreo’ in the 1934 Enciklopedio de Esperanto.

Andreo Cseh (1895-1979), in the 1930s


There we read that the Catholic priest Cseh, an Hungarian from Rumania, in 1920 elaborated his famous teaching method for Esperanto, and that later in Sweden started his triumphant apostleshipthrough various countries. His courses had such a success that the newspapers wrote about a renaissance of Esperanto. [2]
The entry was signed by Julia Isbrücker, who together with her husband Jan supported Cseh’s work. In later years, the adult children of the Isbrückers suspected their mother of having an inappropriate relationship with Cseh…

Writing about oneself or about good friends meets a lot of resistance among Wikipedians, although it is not definitely prohibited. In my duties as a mentor at German Wikipedia, I once had a mentee writing about a professor of law (professors are ‘relevant’ by definition). She asked me whether her text was good, and I said it was fine. A minor thing: She wrote that the person obtained his PhD and became a Dr. iur. As the person is a jurist, and as this is the usual title in Germany for a law PhD, the expression ‘Dr. iur.’ is superfluous and can be dropped. After some days, she replied: ‘I have asked again, and Herr Professor said that he does not want that.’ (The poor girl was obviously the assistant of the professor.)

No doubt that Wikipedia is sufficiently critical about Jimmy Wales; the article about him was created in June 2003. But how did the Encyclopaedia Britannica deal with ‘their’ people’? In the 1950s Britannica had a book series ‘Great Books’, and its prospectus presented a number of small portraits: Platon, Shakespeare, Freud and other great thinkers. I wondered, who were the three men in the center of the picture, in the big portraits. Indeed: the publishers of Encyclopaedia Britannica. [3]

—-
Previously: A as in Advertisement, …, G as in Google
—-
[1] Jeff Loveland: An Alternative encyclopedia? Dennis de Coetlogon’s Universal history of arts and sciences (1745). Voltaire Foundation, Oxford 2010, p. 153.
[2] Enciklopedio de Esperanto, 1933/1934, s.v. ‘Cseh, Andreo’.
[3] Harvey Einbinder: The Myth of the Britannica. MacGibbon & Kee, London 1964 (reprint 1972), p. 337.
本論壇精華索引帖
http://rcu.5d6d.com/thread-840-1-1.html
Decennial ABC: I as in Interwiki


In ancient times, encyclopedias had a certain inherent transnational scope. Since they were written in languages such as Greek and Latin their readers belonged to different ethnic groups.


在古代,百科全書具有一個跨越國界的特性(注:具有某個讀者群眾市場特性)。因為百科以希臘文或拉丁文寫成,他們的讀者隸屬於不同民族。

Encyclopedias or encyclopedic works in ‘ethnic’ or ‘national’ languages origin in the middle ages. Around 1300 French became an important ‘competitor’ to Latin, and Middle High German reached the third rank in Western Europe. But, according to Robert Luff: ‘The choice of the popular language for encyclopedic works was something unusal in the German middle ages, a risk that became routine only at the end of the 15th century.’ [1]


百科全書或百科全書式的著作以民族或國家語言而成源自於中世紀。大約在1300年,法文成為拉丁文的一個重要競爭者,而中高地德語在西歐也成為第三名。

Copying/translating from previous works was common, even after copyright laws have been established in the 19th century. In one way or another, models such as Encyclopaedia Britannica and Brockhaus had a crucial influence on the works in other languages.

從先前的文獻複製/翻譯在當時是司空見慣的普遍行為,儘管在19世紀已經制定了版權法律。

When Wikipedia was established first in English, soon a number of other languages followed. German came in March 2001, then there was a wave in May. Since August 2002 (and the months following) an article in one language version can be easily linked to the correspondent article in other language versions.



維基百科首先以英語開始建立,隨後其他數種語言跟著建立。德語版在2001年3月來臨,接著5月來了一陣大潮。從2002年8月起,不同語言版本的文章能夠彼此建立跨語言連結。

For a linguistic community, especially for a small one, Wikipedia has great advantages to earlier international collaboration. A group of encyclopedia enthusiasts has immediately web space and a concept for an online encyclopedia. A giant text corpus can be used as a basis, and with Wikimedia Commons there exists a huge media collection.


對於一個語言社群而言,尤其對一個小的語言社群來說,維基百科具有較佳的優勢以進行國際性的協同合作。百科全書愛好者群體將線上百科全書當作一個立即地網路空間和一種概念。一個巨大的文本集作為一個基礎,伴隨著存在一個龐大的媒體集合的維基共享網站。
—-
Previously: A as in Advertisement, …, H as in Hagiography
—-
[1] Robert Luff: Wissensvermittlung im europäischen Mittelalter. ‘Imago mundi’-Werke und ihre Prologe. Max Niemeyer Verlag, Tübingen 1999, p. 417.
本論壇精華索引帖
http://rcu.5d6d.com/thread-840-1-1.html
Decennial ABC: J as in Jimbo


It is pretty weird. A few years ago, I was just some guy sitting in front of the internet. Now I send an e-mail or edit an article and it makes headlines around the world … I used to be just a guy — now I’m Jimmy Wales. [2005]

Previously:A as in Advertisement, …,I as in Interwiki
本論壇精華索引帖
http://rcu.5d6d.com/thread-840-1-1.html
J 字母指 Jimbo Jimbo是維基百科創辦人吉米威爾士的小名,J字母這篇文章是指2005年時英國泰晤士報的對Jimbo的一則報導。現在將引述的泰晤士報的文章轉貼過來。

其網址為
http://business.timesonline.co.u ... ndnum=1188516145101


Identity question for world's encyclopaedia
"In my vision of the future of journalism what we will see is an increasing amount of citizen participation in the gathering of news and in feedback and in reporting and analysing the news. At the same time, we’ll have professional organisations managing the process"      By Rhys Blakely

"It is pretty weird," the founder of Wikipedia, the online encyclopaedia, says. "A few years ago, I was just some guy sitting in front of the internet. Now I send an e-mail or edit an article and it makes headlines around the world ... I used to be just a guy – now I'm Jimmy Wales."

「實在是太不可思議了」,線上百科全書─維基百科的創立者說到。「就在幾年以前,我僅是一名坐在網際網路桌前的路人,現在我傳送一封電子郵件或編寫一篇文章,並能夠製造頭條...我曾經只是一名路人,現在我是吉米威爾士。

Depending on your point of view, there are, at least, two very different Jimmy Wales.

從你的觀點而言,至少存在兩個非常不同的吉米威爾士。

For hard-core "wikipedians" there is the founder of one of the wonders of the internet age – a massive, charitably-funded online repository of knowledge, compiled completely by volunteers whose long-term aim is to create versions in all the languages of the world.

「維基人」是這場網路時代奇蹟的創建者 ─ 一場大規模、不求回報付出的線上知識倉庫,由一群矢志建立全世界所有語言版本為目標的志願者進行著。

In contrast, for John Seigenthaler, the founding editorial director of USA Today who last month was linked with the assassination of President John F Kennedy by a libellous Wikipedia article, there is an irresponsible rogue running a haven for "volunteer vandals with poison-pen intellects".

For Mr Wales, neither of these will do.

He calls the Seigenthaler entry the "worst" article on Wikipedia – "not the only bad article on Wikipedia for sure, but … the worst". But while he "definitely worries a lot about how to make sure that articles on Wikipedia are right", he suggests his biggest fear was that the incident would overshadow the rest of the work on the site "which is actually pretty good".

Indeed, according to a recent study by Nature, the scientific journal, Wikipedia is actually no more unreliable than the venerable Encyclopaedia Britannica – the standard to which the website aspires. The report, Mr Wales acknowledges, came in the nick of time – just as the Seigenthaler crisis risked rubbishing Wikipedia's reputation for good.

"It was good to have this thing out there that said it’s not just this crazy place on the internet where people just post nonsense - that Wikipedia’s actually pretty good in parts," he explains.

That "pretty good" refrain sums up the cautious Wikipedia champion. Never mind the Nature commendation. Or that the site now carries more than 2,500,000 articles and has 80 "live" language versions - from Asturian to Waloon, via Scots, "Simple English" and Telugu - with another 100 already in the pipeline. "If what you’re after is 'who won the World Cup in 1986', it’s going to be fine – no problem," he says. "If you want to know something a little more esoteric, or something that’s going to be controversial, you should probably use a second reference – at least."

To understand Wikipedia's place and potential, Mr Wales argues, you have to accept these kind of qualifications. As one reader wrote to the Editor of The Times, to criticise a website which anybody can edit for being "non-authoritative" is a bit like criticising a "newspaper for being flammable".

Similarly, Mr Wales is reluctant to over-hype the worldwide web as a whole. He recently read The Victorian Internet by Tom Standage, a history of the telegraph that describes how in the 19th Century the then new technology was lauded in remarkably similar terms to those used by today’s internet gurus.

"We all like to think that we are living through a time of very rapid change, but that was true in the 19th Century as well," he says.

"On the brink of the 20th Century, people thought that because they could suddenly communicate nearly instantaneously across continents, this could be an end to war. And then the 20th Century came and was a fiasco as far as wars were concerned."

The "outlaw" Jimmy Wales, it turns out, is a very reasonable revolutionary. A finance graduate, he ended a six-year spell as a futures trader in Chicago in 2000. According to one report, he earned enough money in the commodities markets to "support himself and his wife for the rest of their lives".

Mr Wales says that is true – but only because he "lives in a normal house and drives a Hyundai". As a trader, he was involved in computer programming, through which he became interested in the "open software" movement - where volunteer collaborators build "free" software - and began thinking about using similar methods to build an online encyclopaedia. Now 39, he is the head of the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit body that owns Wikipedia, but works unpaid. The Foundation employs just three people to carry out its mission: to provide every person on earth with a free online encyclopaedia in their own language. The real work, after all, is done by the site’s volunteer writers.

The demand for their output is already phenomenal: Wikipedia, which started in 2001, will notch up around 2.5 billion page impressions this month. According to Mr Wales, its traffic volumes are doubling every four months.

The combination of ultra-low overheads and massive readership would excite any media executive. And while the site does not carry any advertising, Wales admits it might. "There is a great deal of resistance to the idea, both from the community and from me. But at some point questions are going to be raised over the amount of money we are turning down," he says.

"In my vision of the future of the newspaper industry and of journalism in general, people who think that traditional media organisations are going to go away are just kidding themselves," he says. "That doesn’t make any sense to me. On other hand, people who think that journalism can just stay the way it is are also just kidding themselves.

"What we will see is a set of hybrid models with an increasing amount of citizen participation in the gathering of news and in feedback and in reporting and analysing the news. And at the same time, we’ll have professional organisations managing the process – basically being the core framework."

The example Mr Wales gives comes from a spell of consulting he carried out for the BBC last year.

"In the sport division of the BBC they are very interested in thinking about how they can have better coverage of minor sports. Sometimes they are criticised for focusing only on major sports. They don’t carry coverage of every sport and every local club around the country – they don’t have enough money, it’s impossible.

"So what they’re saying is, 'wouldn’t be interesting if we had a model where we could cover the major sports with our traditional people and enrich the whole experience by bringing in people to allow other sporting communities to report on themselves?'

"I’d say that makes a lot of sense. In a similar way, if people out there are willing to make webpages and content, then it makes sense for the newspapers to get involved with that."

Alongside blogging, "wiki" technology (the name, according to Wikipedia, is derived from the "wiki wiki", or "quick", buses found at Honolulu Airport) is one obvious route for newspapers to explore if they want to involve their readers online.

The software could be the key to involving potentially limitless numbers of contributors to co-operate on a single piece of content. It works, Mr Wales explains, by incorporating a series of "incentives" that encourage positive amendments. For example, it requires just a single mouse click to undo a piece of "vandalism" on Wikipedia – far less effort than it takes to spoil an article in the first place.

Old media companies, however, have an awful track-record in experimenting with wikis. The biggest disaster came in June, when the Los Angeles Times conducted a live trial to discover whether Wikipedia’s software could be used by users of the newspaper's site to collaboratively write a comment piece on the Iraq war.

"Plenty of sceptics are predicting embarrassment," the paper had said prophetically. "Like an arthritic old lady who takes to the dance floor, they say, the Los Angeles Times is more likely to break a hip than to be hip. We acknowledge that possibility. Nevertheless, we proceed."

So it turned out. In a matter of hours the LA Times's "Wikitorial" proved an unmitigated failure, being swamped with obscene messages and photos.

洛杉磯時報的 Wikitorial 被證明是個不折不扣的失敗品,他被置入了混亂的訊息和色情照片。

Mr Wales applauds the paper’s "brave experiment". But he also makes it clear he would have done things very differently.

"They used our software, but made a few mistakes when they set it up," he says. "They hid all the community features – so they hid ‘recent changes’ for example, so it was impossible for the community to monitor the site’s development.

"Also, they didn’t take the time to build a community. They just started promoting it wholesale to the general public. So that rather than having a core community of people who cared about the site and to look after it they just had people wandering in with no real personal stake in it.

"And the final point I would make is that they chose just about the most difficult thing there can be to write collaboratively: opinion. And in particular, opinion on the Iraq war – that’s a tough topic. It’s not as if there’s a simple for-or-against argument to be made. There’s a million possible variations and it’s not immediately clear how a community can converge on something."

Such moderation has played a major part in the development of the Wikipedia project. Long-standing plans to ring-fence "completed" articles, once they have been reviewed and checked, were given fresh impetus by the Seigenthaler crisis. The software to allow such "stable" articles, which will be closed off from further revision, is now in the final stages. But there will be no hurry to implement it.

"Exactly how we’re going to do that is going to be open to the community," Mr Wales says.

"As we go along, there will be a lot of debate. It turns out that for us there is almost never a simple answer to anything. Just a lot of questions, a lot of discussions and some fairly detailed policies."
本論壇精華索引帖
http://rcu.5d6d.com/thread-840-1-1.html
Decennial ABC: K as in Knowledge
How to keep people involved with Wikipedia? was one of the questions put to Jimmy Wales in July 2004, by readers of Slashdot. Wales answered that when there is an edit war or flame war, consider what Wikipedia is all about. Think of a person ‘who lives without clean drinking water, without any proper means of education, and how our work might someday help that person.’ Shortly after that followed the sentence now so prominently known by Wikipedia activists and fans:
Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge.
To some activists, though, this phrasing gives an uneasy feeling, or even more the common call for ‘share your knowledge’. Isn’t the name of your dog or Shakespeare’s digestion on a specific day a part of ‘all human knowledge’? Couldn’t newbies misunderstand the expression and try to contribute unencyclopedic content?

The key word here is ‘sum’: Not all human knowledge but only a sum is the goal, meaning not literally everything but only a summary, a synopsis. Latin works of the middle ages with the title ‘Summa’ were a kind of encyclopedia or a short consumption of a field of knowledge.
Anyway, the expression ‘sum of all human knowledge’ itself can claim no special originality. It is actually very common in the modern history of encyclopedias.

Dropping Knowledge


In her PhD thesis ‘Das Streben nach Wissen’, Ulrike Spree refers to the title of a work by George Lillie Craik, from 1830. He wrote that the pursuit of knowledge is different from the pursuit for wealth or fame because it does not need capital or competition. It knows only winners, no losers. [1]
The title of his work is: ‘The Pursuit of Knowledge Under Difficulties’. Wouldn’t that make a good title for the history of Wikipedia?
—-
Previously: A as in Advertisement, …, J as in Jimbo
—-
[1] Ulrike Spree: Das Streben nach Wissen. Eine vergleichende Gattungsgeschichte der populären Enzyklopädie in Deutschland und Großbritannien im 19. Jahrhundert, Niemeyer 2000, p. 7.
本論壇精華索引帖
http://rcu.5d6d.com/thread-840-1-1.html
Decennial ABC: L as in Links


Are links an invention of the internet age?
When in the 1990s the Internet came up as a mass medium, philosophers were keen to theorize about ‘hypertext’. A hypertextexceeds the limitations of a linear text, it allows a reader to decide whether to go on reading the text or to follow a link to another text.

Nothing new under the sun. Marginalia and footnotes were the predecessors of such modern links, and they were used also in encyclopedias. According to Loveland, the Fons memorabilium by Domenico Bandini was one of the first works with cross referencing (ca. 1440). [1]

Not only, but especially in the age of modern encyclopedias with their alphabetical order those cross references were a means to cope with the mass of content.

Loveland noted a peticular problem about the Universal history (1740s): it had a lot of cross references, and they were usually accurate, but they referred only to whole articles, not parts of it. [2] This was especially problematic in a long-article-encyclopedia such as the Universal history. Spree wrote in 1999 about the uncertain consequences of new technologies for lexicography. Links to internet pages cannot guarantee their own continuity and longevity because content on the web is changing so quickly. [3]

In Wikipedia these two problems partly integrated to one double problem. In general, it is possible to link from one Wikipedia article to another and even to one specific article section. But Wikipedians recommend not to do so, because the name of a section can be changed, and then links to it will no longer work.

On the long term the problem vanishes. Many articles get more and more ‘sub articles’, meaning that new articles are created dealing with one aspect of a subject. For example, the article ‘Estonia’ in English Wikipedia was created in 2001; in February 2002 followed ‘Economy of Estonia’. So you don’t have to link to the ‘Economy’ section of the ‘Estonia’ article anymore.

—-
Previously: A as in Advertisement, …, K as in Knowledge
—-
[1] Jeff Loveland: An Alternative encyclopedia? Dennis de Coetlogon’s Universal history of arts and sciences (1745). Voltaire Foundation, Oxford 2010, p. 115.
[2] Jeff Loveland: An Alternative encyclopedia? Dennis de Coetlogon’s Universal history of arts and sciences (1745). Voltaire Foundation, Oxford 2010, p. 152.
[3] Ulrike Spree: Das Streben nach Wissen. Eine vergleichende Gattungsgeschichte der populären Enzyklopädie in Deutschland und Großbritannien im 19. Jahrhundert, Niemeyer 2000, p. 327.
本論壇精華索引帖
http://rcu.5d6d.com/thread-840-1-1.html
返回列表