评论
打印
It is likely that our entry on “China” is shorter than our entry on “Harry Potter” too.
“中国” 条目的长度可能都超不过“哈利波特”
But that’s more because we have a short overview article on “China” and then break out specific topics into separate articles.
但这是因为“中国”条目只是一个概览，更多的内容都在各个子条目中。
What happens normally is that when one entry gets too long, people will naturally want to break it up.
当一个条目太长，人们通常会很自然地想要将它分开。
When I was a student at Ohio State, I had Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger as a philosophy professor.
我在俄亥俄州上学的时候，哲学教授拉里桑格是维基百科的合伙创始人
Sanger had a policy that if you used Wikipedia as a source on a paper, you would receive an automatic five point deduction.
规定论文中不得引用维基百科的内容，违者一律扣除5分。
Do you think Wikipedia is reliable enough at this stage to pass as a source on an academic paper?
你是否同意，维基百科是否足够可靠，可以在学术性文章中引用？
I would do the same thing if I were teaching a course at a university.
如果我是大学老师的话，我也会采取同样的做法。
I would also deduct 5 points for citing Britannica.
我同样也会对从大英百科全书中引用扣除5分。
This is simply not the proper role for an encyclopedia, no matter how good, in the research process.
在研究领域不管百科全书写得多么好，它都不是用来引用的。
A high quality encyclopedia is a starting point, giving us broad background knowledge and helping us to firmly and correctly fill in gaps, not an original source.
一部高质量的百科全书只是一个起点，告诉你一些宽泛的背景知识，帮助你明确地、正确地填补问题，并不能取代原始材料。
The right thing to do is to quickly read the Wikipedia entry to get your bearings, and then go read the original sources.
正确的做法是，读完百科全书中的介绍后确定方向，再去读原始材料。
In 2007, Wikipedia decided to add no-follow tags to all of its external links.
2007年，维基百科决定为所有外部链接添加“不准跟踪链接”属性。
This drew the ire of some and sparked the creation of anti-Wikipedia wordpress plugins that automatically turn all the Wikipedia links on a person’s blog to no follow.
石激起千层浪，很多反维基百科者编写了博客插件可以自动将个人博客里的维基百科链接更改为不准跟踪链接。
Has the community’s decision to place no-follow tags around external links kept out spam, and do you think Wikipedia would ever decide to flip the switch back?
为外部链接添加不准跟踪链接，这种做法对防止垃圾信息是否有效？你觉得未来会恢复回去吗？
