Hi Nathan! If a field includes an EA-relevant concept which could benefit from an explanation in EA language, then I donât see why we shouldnât just include an entry for that particular concept.
For concepts which are less directly EA-relevant, the marginal value of including entries for them in the wiki (when theyâre already searchable on Wikipedia) is less clear to me. On the contrary, it could plausibly promote the perception that thereâs an âauthoritative EA interpretation/âopinionâ of an unrelated field, which could cause needless controversy or division.
Hi Nathan! If a field includes an EA-relevant concept which could benefit from an explanation in EA language, then I donât see why we shouldnât just include an entry for that particular concept.
For concepts which are less directly EA-relevant, the marginal value of including entries for them in the wiki (when theyâre already searchable on Wikipedia) is less clear to me. On the contrary, it could plausibly promote the perception that thereâs an âauthoritative EA interpretation/âopinionâ of an unrelated field, which could cause needless controversy or division.