Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2020-11-01/Book review
Discuss this story
- Pfft. Is there really much benefit to hindsight, in this particular case?
Both show, with benefit of hindsight, that people and the press didn't understand what Wikipedia was and how it could develop.
- I mean, that's should hardly come as a surprise to anyone. Most of the press (and plenty of the public) still don't seem to get it today, so there's no way in hell they got it 20 years ago. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 21:58, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- I hope this came through in the essay, but it's been a surprise to those of us who have been contributors since close to the beginning too! I honestly don't think anyone involved really predicted or understood what Wikipedia could be and has become, from breaking news to now a linked data ecosystem. It's been a wild ride! Smallbones, thanks for the review; it was a pleasure to write with such a knowledgeable group. -- phoebe / (talk to me) 14:27, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- I read a bunch of the Wikipedia@20 chapters and, on the whole, was impressed. It painted a very clear picture of how Wikipedia has changed and what its strengths and weaknesses have been. Ganesha811 (talk) 21:30, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Still waiting for the people who complain about "Westernized publications and knowledge-sharing practices" to offer us an alternative inclusion and reliable sourcing policy that doesn't let the encyclopedia get flooded with garbage. There still is plenty of reliable source material about undercovered areas that we have yet to incorporate, it just requires more effort find it. -Indy beetle (talk) 19:28, 4 November 2020 (UTC)