Not signed in (Sign In)

Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.


    The question is quite old - 2010, but seems to me quite (very) important. Similar question comes to my mind also, but it seems to me reopening old question is better way than asking new one.
    It seems there was no meta thread for closing.
    It seems discussing reopening on meta is what is usually suggested.

    The main argument that Wikipedia, is highly (top 1-2 ) important resource for math education,
    and partly research, so is directly related to math community.

    As far as I understand the closing party argument was that questions is too much discussiony,
    but, hey, almost all top-voted questions are "soft".
    • CommentAuthorHenry Cohn
    • CommentTimeOct 14th 2012

    This question seems to be asking for speculative opinions about Wikipedia's potential for future impact in advanced mathematics. That could be an interesting discussion, but I don't see it as a good fit for MO.

    I'm sympathetic to certain kinds of questions that in principle don't fit well. For example, math career advice questions aren't really what MO was intended for, but when we can't suggest a genuinely better place for them, I'm in favor of answering some of them on MO. Even though they are subjective, the distribution of answers from the community says something important, and this can really matter for anyone facing the career issue in question. However, I don't see the same kind of pressing need to discuss Wikipedia's future on MO.

    My impression is that the usual exceptions made for disscussions, soft questions, or topics that are off-topic according to the word of the law are usually made because they are of direct relevance to some individuals. I don't think this question fits the bill.

    I can't even imagine what an appropriate answer might look like. One could list in detail where the coverage of some mathematical field or topic in Wikipedia is misleading or incomplete, but that would be an answer with an expiration date. There isn't much of a question to answer otherwise. The only actual question outside the title was "And will the site itself be sustainable over decades to come?" I don't think the general future of Wikipedia is an appropriate topic for MO, the scope is way too wide and mathematicians are not more qualified to discuss this than many other groups.