Openpedia.org > Wikipedia, credentials and authority
[weaverluke] Essjay's great sin - the reason Wales [Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia's co-founder and effective leader] ultimately sent him into exile - wasn't that he lied to the press but that he hoodwinked his fellow Wikipedians, that he used his fake credentials to get them to grant him deference in editing articles. In making his proposal to adopt a formal credentialing process, Wales is simply underscoring what is now obvious: at Wikipedia, credentials matter, whether genuine or fake.
Some related posts from Technorati and Google.
[Blog.hackingcough.com] Hacking Cough: On Wikipedia, nobody's sure you're a prof: As Dr Zen notes in a comment to one of Seth Finkelstein's posts on the subject: "Essjay simply lied to big himself up." For the moment, Essjay's response is a big fat "no comment" and let the PRs sort it out: "The press teams are trained in making statements that should be repeated in the press; I am not." But they can work with what they are told by the client, a client that does not seem overly bothered about Ryan Jordan's efforts to use a position to obtain credibility with people outside the Wikipedia inner circle.
[Blog.citizendium.org] Citizendium Blog » Wikipedia firmly supports your right to ...: There’s something utterly breathtaking, and ultimately tragic, about Jimmy telling The New Yorker that he doesn’t have a problem with Essjay’s lies, and by essentially honoring Essjay after his lies were exposed. As Blogworld quite rightly said, “By his [Jimmy’s] actions or lack thereof … and [by] his words he is endorsing fraud.” I’ve become increasingly disillusioned by Jimmy’s behavior, but this I simply wouldn’t have expected. It’s one thing to revise history self-servingly. But this new incident seems self-destructive on a level beyond previous incidents. Doesn’t Jimmy realize that this could well blow up in his face–that it could well be picked up by the news media and severely damage not only Wikipedia’s reputation, but Wikia’s bottom line (since Wikia is, still, Essjay’s employer)? The media is already making some noise (the story broke yesterday) and it’s likely only to get hotter. The media now loves a good Wikipedia scandal. Since this one has such a compelling narrative line, and a “you can’t make this stuff up” quality to it, how can tech reporters resist? And how can respected observers of the scene then fail to draw some obvious conclusions, as the blogosphere is already doing in its usual vigorous way?
Reflected tags on Technorati: Blog, Wikipedia, Openpedia.org