Jump to content

User:Nectarflowed

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.
Part of a series on
Psychology
Basic psychology
Applied psychology
Concepts
Lists

I'm doing graduate work in cognitive science in California. My username is from Ovid's Metamorphoses' description of the early days of humankind (pp. 5-7).

Principle of charity

In classical rhetoric, the principle of charity demands that when making an argument one assumes the most generous interpretation of one's opponent's statements, so that one's own argument is not derailed by simply claiming that the opponent's statements were misconstrued. This suggests that the most principled response to epithets is to ignore them, accepting at face value the user's claim to a narrow interpretation while again adopting more neutral terminology in one's own arguments (List of political epithets).

"Largest encyclopedia"

The english Wikipedia, at 1,200,000 articles, has 10 times the number of articles as the world's largest English language encyclopedia, Encyclopedia Britannica online (120,000 articles[1]).

Usage

Alexa, the internet tracking site, ranks Wikipedia.org (all languages) in the top 50 on their internet traffic list.[2] See, for example, this comparison between Wikipedia and the New York Times. In their tracking, the number of visitors to Wikipedia increased about 700% from July 2004 to July 2005.[3]

"Wikipedia attracted 22.3 per cent of users searching for information about the Gaza Strip as Israeli troops closed down settlements and withdrew from the region. Wikipedia's market share numbers meant it drew five times more traffic than Google News, Yahoo News or the BBC and tied with CIA World Factbook for information on the strip." --"Wikipedia eclipses CIA", The Register. 7th September 2005

Nature published a study in December, 2005, that found a comparable error rate in Wikipedia to the Encyclopedia Britannica in scientific articles.[4] The authors argue this "suggests such high-profile examples (like the Seigenthaler and Curry situations) are the exception rather than the rule."

Raul's first law:

  • "Much of Wikipedia's content, and all of the day to day functions are overseen by a small core of the most dedicated contributors. These users are the most valuable resource Wikipedia has.
"Corollary - Of these highly dedicated users who have left, the vast majority left as a result of trolls, vandals, and/or POV warriors - typically not as a result of any one particular user, but from the combined stress of dealing with many of them. Consequently, such problem users should be viewed as Wikipedia's biggest handicap."


"In the jargon of library and information science, lay readers [of Wikipedia] rely upon "secondary epistemic criteria," clues to the credibility of information when they do not have the expertise to judge the content." [5]("Anonymous Source Is Not the Same as Open Source," NY Times, 3/2006)

Contributions

Some of the articles I've started that I think are interesting include: Anti-racist mathematics, Kistler Prize, Ethnic nepotism, Decade of the Brain, Bruce Lahn, Noah Rosenberg, and Bernard Davis (and the "moralistic fallacy").

Created templates

I've created some templates that seemed useful:

1 {{Needs|from}} (critics/proponents/etc.)

{{Needs|critics}}

2 {{RPA}}: (Personal attack removed)

3 {{Summarystyle}}

{{Summarystyle}}

4 {{Summarystyle-section}}

{{Summarystyle-section}}

Interesting articles

History of humankind

Main article: History of the world

Science and philosophy

Misc.

  • Cherry picking - selectively presenting evidence that supports one's position
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nectarflowed&oldid=838369135"