Posted: Mar 16, 2020 10:03 am
Why would somebody attempt to use wikipedia to make any progress on substantive issues in European history or historical linguistics? It would be an error in judgement, at the very least. It's hard enough even for academic historians and linguists but they are the ones who establish what the substantive issues are in these areas. Anyway, what does progress look like, besides the fact that some questions cease being revived, except among cranks? Even identifying the substantive issues looks a lot like a matter of opinion, and wikipedia for this purpose is here significantly a repository of opinion.