E 百科全书 Decennial ABC: E as in Encyclopedia Is Wikipedia an encyclopedia? 维基百科是一部百科全书吗？ In her 2010 PhD thesis, Daniela Pscheida writes constantly about ‘the so-called online encyclopedia Wikipedia’ and ultimately explains why Wikipedia according to her is no encyclopedia. She thinks that Wikipedia misunderstood its own identity: *On the one hand, Wikipedia sees itself in the tradition of encyclopedias. *On the other hand, Wikipedia exceeds the limits of the genre encyclopedia by accepting new topics such as contemporary events. Wikipedia to her is a database. [1] 在她2010年的博士论文中，Daniela Pscheida ..并解释了为什麽维基百科不是百科全书。 她认为维基百科误解了自己的身份。 * 一方面，维基百科将自己视为传统的百科全书之列。 * 在另一方面，维基百科超越了百科全书学派，接纳了全新的题材，例如维基百科可以写 当代的事件。 维基百科对她来说是一部资料库。 Maybe Daniela Pscheida’s opinions relate to the fact that she describes Wikipedia quite well and extensively but (for any reason) did not notice our rule No Original Research. At the end, she even recommends that scholars establish new theories via Wikipedia, aside the traditional way of peer-review. 也许 Daniela Pscheida 描述维基百科的许多观点非常好，贴近事实且全面，但是她忽略 了我们的一项规则，「拒绝原创研究」。在文末，她还建议学者在传统的同行评审之外， 藉由维基百科来建立新的理论。 Whether Wikipedia is an encyclopedia or not, we can argue. About this last thing, we can’t. Sorry. 维基百科是否是一部百科全书，这我们可以讨论。但关於最後一点，抱歉，我们不能接受 。 Modern encyclopedias and our concept of an encyclopedia were shaped in the 18th century. Earlier, the notion and the subject already existed, but were not linked the way we tend to do nowadays. The ancient Greek term is of uncertain etymology. Paul Scalich’s Encyclopaedia of 1539 was the first reference work to have the word in its title. [2] 现代的百科全书以及我们对於百科全书的概念成形於18世纪。 Not only are there a lot of expressions for an encyclopedia, the content was very diverse and presented in different ways. Based on that, it is difficult to exclude a work from the list of encyclopedias if it does not match to what somebody has in mind. An encyclopedia does not cover contemporary events and things? It does, this was the main intention of the original ‘Konversations-Lexika’, to capture the Zeitgeist and help the reader to participate in conversations about society and politics. 百科全书不包含当代事件题材？确实如此，这意涵主要来自於「会话辞典」，为了捕捉时 代精神并协助读者参与到关於社会与政治的对话。 Ulrike Spree wrote that people thinking about encyclopedias don’t have a list of criteria in mind, but prototypes. In the prefaces of their works, the authors or publishers file their work in the tradition of encyclopedias, using other encyclopedias as model or as counter-example. Wikipedia is not different. Who was the biggest Wikipedia critic?谁是最大的维基百科评论者? For example, it seems to be more common in Germany than in the English-speaking world that readers complain about the length of Wikipedia articles. According to them, an encyclopedia consists of rather short articles. This may relate to the fact that in the German-speaking world the most popular traditional encyclopedia was Brockhaus, a short-article-encyclopedia. 举例来说，比起英语世界而言，德文版似乎更常见到读者在抱怨维基百科文章的长度。根 据他们的抱怨内容，一部百科全书(应)包含相当短的文章。这可能与一个事实有关，在德 文世界里，最广为使用的百科全书是 Brockhaus ，一部简短文章的百科全书。 In 2005, the German language Wikipedians had a discussion about footnotes, whether to use them in articles. Several of them said that footnotes are not used in an encyclopedia. Again, it depends on the historical model you follow. 在2005年，德文维基百科有过一次关於文章中该不该包含注脚的讨论。他们之中的许多人 认为，注脚不曾用於百科全书之中。 In 2007 German Stern magazine presented a close comparison of Brockhaus and Wikipedia, in which Wikipedia appeared to be the better encyclopedia, Klaus Holoch said that the Wikipedia principle is interesting. But Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia (‘Lexikon’), he claimed, because it is gratuitous and unchecked. 2007年德国Stern杂志刊出一则维基百科与 Brockhaus百科的比较，维基百科相比之下更 形出色，Klaus Holoch则称维基百科的原理是有趣的。他主张维基百科不是一部百科全书 ，因为他是free(或无目的的)，且内容是未经校对的。 Incidentally, Klaus Holoch was the chief sales representative of Brockhaus. 顺带一提，Klaus Holoch是Brockhaus百科全书的销售代表。 —– Previously: A as in Advertisement, B as in Balance, C as in Cooperations, D as in Deletions —– [1] Daniela Pscheida: Das Wikipedia-Universum. Wie das Internet unsere Wissenskultur verändert. transcript, Bielefeld 2010, pp. 442-446. [2] Ulrike Spree: Das Streben nach Wissen. Eine vergleichende Gattungsgeschichte der populären Enzyklopädie in Deutschland und Groß britannien im 19. Jahrhundert, Niemeyer 2000, p. 17/18. --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 118.169.36.72