Yet again I'll take up the Wikipedia cause. On the one hand, there are lots of errors in lots of printed "authoritative" sources (these can be hard to fix). On the other hand, if it's wrong and you can document it, you can fix Wikipedia right away.
To use or reject Wikipedia naively is no help. To exercise critical judgment and caution, and to help make it better, is the nature of scholarship. People are going to use Wikipedia; why not then work to improve it?
Since Wikipedia is dedicated to NPOV, a neutral point of view (a troublesome concept in some situations), it won't have the ilan and personal insight that a signed encyclopedia article can have. What one day seems a bias may turn out to be the direction forward. Still, Wikipedia is clear about its goals and methods, which are worthy, and it's a way of reaching a broad general audience.
So, are some E-Sylum readers going to work to improve and oversee Wikipedia articles and subjects?
I think we can all agree that every resource has its limitations. But Arthur's call is a reasonable one. If there are numismatic misstatements or missing facts out there on Wikipedia, take a crack at fixing them. It's been ages since I've looked anything up there, but for better or worse the general public gets a lot of its information there. -Editor
Wayne Homren, Editor
The Numismatic Bibliomania Society is a non-profit organization promoting numismatic literature. See our web site at coinbooks.org.
To submit items for publication in The E-Sylum, write to the Editor at this address: email@example.com
To subscribe go to: https://my.binhost.com/lists/listinfo/esylum
All Rights Reserved.
NBS Home Page
Contact the NBS webmaster