 | This is an
essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been
thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
Randy in Boise is the archetypal uninformed but relentless Wikipedia editor. Randy in Boise rose to fame in an essay about Wikipedia in Wired:
The Wikipedia philosophy can be summed up thusly: "Experts are scum." For some reason people who spend 40 years learning everything they can about, say, the Peloponnesian War—and indeed, advancing the body of human knowledge—get all pissy when their contributions are edited away by Randy in Boise who heard somewhere that sword-wielding skeletons were involved. And they get downright irate when asked politely to engage in discourse with Randy until the sword-skeleton theory can be incorporated into the article without passing judgment. [1]
Wikipedia's policies are apparently all Greek to Randy in Boise. Hearing about something somewhere does not qualify it for inclusion in Wikipedia articles.
In The Death of Expertise, Tom Nichols observed that:
Americans have reached a point where ignorance, especially of anything related to public policy, is an actual virtue. To reject the advice of experts is to assert autonomy, a way for Americans to insulate their increasingly fragile egos from ever being told they’re wrong about anything. It is a new Declaration of Independence: No longer do we hold these truths to be self-evident, we hold all truths to be self-evident, even the ones that aren’t true. All things are knowable and every opinion on any subject is as good as any other. [2]
- Wikipedia:Due weight, which for sword-wielding skeletons in the Peloponnesian War would be zero
- Dunning–Kruger effect, which Randy fervently denies he suffers from.
- Cases:
- User:Jnc/Astronomer vs Amateur, on how these discussions go
- Wikipedia:Randy in space, because Randy is not a modern problem.
- Wikipedia:Asshole John rule, how individuals inspire the creation of bureaucratic rules
- Philosophy and practice:
- Wikipedia:Competence is required, on what to do with editors who are trying to improve the encyclopedia, but...
- Wikipedia:Expert retention (please don't quit over Randy)
- Wikipedia:Anti-elitism, and its effects (other than Randy)
- Advice for experts:
- Wikipedia:Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia, a somewhat condescending essay aimed at real-world scientists
- Help:Wikipedia editing for research scientists, a more advanced guide to the community
- Help:Wikipedia editing for non-academic experts
- Related matters:
- Other
- ^ Sjöberg, Lore (19 April 2006). "The Wikipedia FAQK". Wired. Retrieved 21 October 2017.
- ^ Nichols, Tom M. (2017). The Death of Expertise: The Campaign Against Established Knowledge and Why it Matters. Oxford University Press. p. x. ISBN 978-0190469412.
| This is an
essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been
thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
Randy in Boise is the archetypal uninformed but relentless Wikipedia editor. Randy in Boise rose to fame in an essay about Wikipedia in Wired:
The Wikipedia philosophy can be summed up thusly: "Experts are scum." For some reason people who spend 40 years learning everything they can about, say, the Peloponnesian War—and indeed, advancing the body of human knowledge—get all pissy when their contributions are edited away by Randy in Boise who heard somewhere that sword-wielding skeletons were involved. And they get downright irate when asked politely to engage in discourse with Randy until the sword-skeleton theory can be incorporated into the article without passing judgment. [1]
Wikipedia's policies are apparently all Greek to Randy in Boise. Hearing about something somewhere does not qualify it for inclusion in Wikipedia articles.
In The Death of Expertise, Tom Nichols observed that:
Americans have reached a point where ignorance, especially of anything related to public policy, is an actual virtue. To reject the advice of experts is to assert autonomy, a way for Americans to insulate their increasingly fragile egos from ever being told they’re wrong about anything. It is a new Declaration of Independence: No longer do we hold these truths to be self-evident, we hold all truths to be self-evident, even the ones that aren’t true. All things are knowable and every opinion on any subject is as good as any other. [2]
- Wikipedia:Due weight, which for sword-wielding skeletons in the Peloponnesian War would be zero
- Dunning–Kruger effect, which Randy fervently denies he suffers from.
- Cases:
- User:Jnc/Astronomer vs Amateur, on how these discussions go
- Wikipedia:Randy in space, because Randy is not a modern problem.
- Wikipedia:Asshole John rule, how individuals inspire the creation of bureaucratic rules
- Philosophy and practice:
- Wikipedia:Competence is required, on what to do with editors who are trying to improve the encyclopedia, but...
- Wikipedia:Expert retention (please don't quit over Randy)
- Wikipedia:Anti-elitism, and its effects (other than Randy)
- Advice for experts:
- Wikipedia:Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia, a somewhat condescending essay aimed at real-world scientists
- Help:Wikipedia editing for research scientists, a more advanced guide to the community
- Help:Wikipedia editing for non-academic experts
- Related matters:
- Other
- ^ Sjöberg, Lore (19 April 2006). "The Wikipedia FAQK". Wired. Retrieved 21 October 2017.
- ^ Nichols, Tom M. (2017). The Death of Expertise: The Campaign Against Established Knowledge and Why it Matters. Oxford University Press. p. x. ISBN 978-0190469412.