Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Larry Sanger = "Mid-importance"

I fully admit that this post is a bit of trolling, but I'm essentially a fan of Larry Sanger's, so no real harm intended, Dr. Sanger. It's more of a swipe at Wikipedia itself.

First, the link.

Ever since May 2007, the Wikipediots have classified the Wikipedia article about the co-founder of the project (and the lead co-founder, at that, at least in my opinion), Larry Sanger, as "rated as Mid-importance on the (WikiProject:Wikipedia) project's importance scale".

Among articles relating to Wikipedia, there are two classes higher than the "Mid-importance" grade. First, there's "High-importance", which is reserved for articles like:

Wikimania
Simple English Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review
...and the truly Highly-important, Wikitext

Then, even higher than High is the "Top-importance" category. That is reserved for the truly lofty topics related to Wikipedia. You know, Jimmy Wales, Mediawiki, and Wikipedia. No others.

Sanger is stuck down in the "Mid-importance" category with things like Cebuanu Wikipedia, Michael Snow (attorney), Wikipedia CD Selection, Enciclopedia Libre Universal en EspaƱol, and Uncyclopedia (this is WikiProject:Wikipedia, after all, which wouldn't be doing its job without some free advertising for a Wikia, Inc. property).

At least Sanger is a notch above the "Low-importance" stuff like Gollum browser, Mzoli's, and Bishnupriya Manipuri Wikipedia (the 47th largest of all Wikipedias).

3 comments:

iridescent said...

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ALarry_Sanger&diff=279368360&oldid=277029567
Fixed. FWIW I agree with the top-ranking of Wikitext – whatever your opinion of Jimmy Wales and Wikipedia, it was an inspired idea (even if he didn't do the actually programming himself) and will, I suspect, be what he's remembered for when Wikipedia is long-forgotten. "Anyone can edit" would have been meaningless if contributors had all been expected to use complicated html formatting – wikitext meant that users without any specialist knowledge of page markup could create adequately formatted articles. How many users do you think MWB would have if your editors had to contribute pages in raw source code?

Gregory Kohs said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gregory Kohs said...

I refuse to comment on the users of MyWikiBiz, iridescent. At least while I marvel at the power of this blog to generate a "cause-and-effect" on Wikipedia itself.

Amazing, that the Wikipediots thus refuse to include this blog in the "Planet Wikimedia" aggregate feed, even while for many months they included another blog that was rather reckless, but which I shall not mention by name.