> > > > > > FamilySearch.org has wiki, forums now.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "James W Anderson" <jander7@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > > > >
> > > > > ...I'm not so certain that's a good thing....
> > > > >
> > > > > D. Stussy <spam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > > >
> > > > Nice thing about a wiki, is that it's a real-time manifestation of
> > > > the peer review process. Bad entries are improved, good entries
> > > > are improved, and vandalism is evident and easily corrected.
> > > >
> > > > Dave Hinz
> > >
> > > Uhhh, but whether one used a wiki or a guest book or something else
> > > instead, the question of the necessity of the duplicative content
> > > remains?
> > >
> > >Cheryl Singhals <singhals@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >
> > Please explain why you think Wiki's duplicate content is any
> > different from the countless duplications that already exist.
> >
> > Bill
>
> Because it's (a) newer and (b) from an organization that ought to be
> aware of the multiple other similar resources it's duplicating.
>
> It's NOT because it's out of SLC. It would be needlessly
> duplicative if it were from the DAR, the UDC, or the Mayflower
> Society.
>
> Cheryl Singhals <singhals@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
There is duplication all over the web. If it's an issue with a
wiki, it's an issue with lots of other places. Are you bothered by
that duplication, or is it only if it's done in a wiki environment?
Bill
Q <quolla6@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
|
