• Telodzrum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Wikis are not really a defense against this issue, they are by nature a secondary or (occasionally by policy) a tertiary source of information. Once the source they are recording dies so does the value of that page on the wiki. From the OP:

    54% of Wikipedia pages contain at least one link in their “References” section that points to a page that no longer exists.

    • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      There’s nothing intrinsically non-primary in the format. At the end of the day they’re collaborative writing projects, split into pages with internal and external links; it’s just that the biggest one out there happens to be tertiary.

      And I believe that they could help a lot with this issue if people migrated/copied meaningful info from forums (like Lemmy) to wikis. Forums are good for discussion, but they tend to accumulate a lot of trash; having the good content sieved and sorted in a wiki makes it more accessible for everyone.

      • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        There’s nothing intrinsically non-primary in the format. At the end of the day they’re collaborative writing projects, split into pages with internal and external links; it’s just that the biggest one out there happens to be tertiary.

        This is an accurate point. Thanks for the correction. I think what I should have said is that the biggest one has that policy and, as a result, there is a trend of others following suit.