Timeline for Is wikipedia authoring here necessary and allowed?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 5, 2012 at 17:54 | comment | added | Rik Smith-Unna | And I agree that in general, citing the scientific literature should be preferred over linking to websites. But there's nothing to stop a more expert user writing a better referenced answer, or from commenting on a bad answer to explain the referencing policy (which we should have in the FAQ). | |
| Feb 5, 2012 at 17:52 | comment | added | Rik Smith-Unna | @WernerSchmitt I really don't think self-answering discourages expert answers. If I see a question where the answers aren't as good as they could be, I write a better answer. Time elapsed since the question was asked is a factor is how much recognition a good answer will get, but someone asking a question and answering it is better than the question not getting asked, and better than it being asked and not getting answered. I agree it's unethical to accept your own answer with say 2 weeks of asking the question, as you don't give other answers a chance - the votes should speak first. | |
| Jan 8, 2012 at 4:16 | comment | added | Werner Schmitt | Keeping this question open I bet we might have got a much more detailed and up to date answer by a student or professional working in this field. Popular Science is fine, but please no guardian articles on key questions of current research, I can google this myself, you drive experts away this way. Even reddit has a higher level of info, we need insightful opinions with arguments and no link collection most hobby interested viewers here will not look up at all, but thank-vote for effort | |
| Jan 8, 2012 at 4:08 | comment | added | Werner Schmitt | It's commonly known that the first quite correct well-formatted answer on SE will yield the most votes and attention, especially if this answer is early accepted, old voters will not come back very often to vote the other answers, the top answer gets more votes, faster accepted than with competing answers, this is pretty obvious and how many rep-gaimers try to yield high rep, by fast and fairly correct and complete answers. If you are a expert you don't come here to ask questions and answer it yourself,how does this make sense? SE would be full of self-authored Q&A.Do you want to duplicate WP? | |
| Jan 8, 2012 at 4:05 | comment | added | Werner Schmitt | @TimN The point of SE is to yield high quality by competition in answers and gaining rep. Self-authoring is the most counterproductive thing you can do here, as you gain a huge time and voting advance vs. competing answers. Fact. Thats why often edited answers become CW automatically as shorter answers below with much less votes are often no more read. Following your reasoning of "duplicate effort" it the aim of SE to yield not many different answers and self-Q&A the most natural way to contribute to this place. This site wants exactly to animate people putting effort in additional answers!? | |
| Jan 7, 2012 at 14:25 | comment | added | user24 | @WernerSchmitt: I can't see any reason to delay answering your own question; doing so would 1) deprive others of the answer, and 2) duplicate the effort in case someone else writes an answer. | |
| Jan 5, 2012 at 14:22 | comment | added | Werner Schmitt | I widely agree with what SE is and what votes mean - popularity - but at this stage such a copy-paste self-authoring style of shortened wikipedia stuff is imho pretty counterproductive and looks more like rep gaiming to me. I appreciate Larians effort, but maybe he should then become a wikipedia author or make his answer a community wiki or at least wait before answering himself. This way no one is incited to post a detailed further answer as he already earned most votes and the question is "solved"... at least I expect a definition what life, synthetic life is (no linked info) | |
| Jan 4, 2012 at 21:04 | history | answered | Mad Scientist | CC BY-SA 3.0 |