It should come as no surprise that I love Wikipedia.org. According to Wikipedia's own entry, it is a "multilingual Web-based free-content encyclopedia." Wikipedia is also known as "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit." Anybody who spends a little time learning the formatting standards and methods (look at the Wikipedia Wikipedia Boot Camp for help) can edit, add to, and create articles on the site, contributing their knowledge and expertise to that of the community. It's a truly amazing model for information collection and dispersion, putting control of the information in the hands of the users.
These users form a community that is dedicated to research and education. One amazing feature of the site is the reference desk where one can ask a question about any topic that is not easily found in the encyclopedia. The other users on the site will contribute their thoughts and comments on the topic.
Wikipedia's main strength can also be its biggest weakness -- by creating a community-based site and calling it an "encyclopedia" it makes it possible for people to publish false and malicious information in a trusted forum. However, a conscientious researcher will always consider his or her source carefully before considering the information to be factual. With the advent of the internet and the ability for anybody to publish anything, this is even more important.
Worse than information that is incomplete or incorrect is information that is purposely misleading, irrelevant or inconsistent with the mission of the site. Take for example the John Siegenthaler biography controversy in which a Wikipedia user edited the biography entry for John Siegenthaler Sr., suggesting that he had a role in the Kennedy assassination.
Other people may edit entries and add information that is completely irrelevant to the article. For instance, there is the recent bit of editing of the "smoke and mirrors" article in which a user has attempted to a statement about the 49th Ward of Chicago's tendency to make use of "smoke and mirrors." Fortunately, it is easy to revert the article to a state where it better fits in with the purpose of the site, and it is also possible to see what other edits this user has made and hopefully put a stop to it. (See the article's edit history and the activities of 24.12.63.77.
- "[H]owever closely a Wikipedia article may at some point in its life attain to reliability, it is forever open to the uninformed or semiliterate meddler." - Former Encyclopedia Britannica editor Robert McHenry in an oft-cited 2004 piece The Faith-Based Encyclopedia.
- "Wikipedia knows all, and what it doesn't know, you can tell it." - Shaye Horwitz
- "The real problem is not Wikipedia, but reporters who fail to check their facts." - Joseph Wilson
- "Only an idiot and a thug would scribble nonsense in a library book." - Alison Hess Garcia
8 comments:
I did this smoke and mirror link upjust for you Archie. Now go check smoke filled room, back room dealing and the secret hand shake.
I'm flattered at the time you spend monitoring my blog. I'm even more flattered you spend time writing about it.
Does Alderman Moore pay you well Archie or do you do it for free?
Oops, did you click the "just for you Archie" link?
It's that damn link up for extra page hits to increase my site reading monitor. Gotcha.
Check Wikipedia for sucker too.
What's Bart Simpson have to say about all this? I missed his quote today. Or do you need to check the "invisible quote" description in Wikipedia?
Gee, can you imagine all the different words phrases and saying Wikipedia has? The possibilities are endless.
One more thing Archie. I was also waiting for the Lisa Simpson quote on the caught cat-napping in public scandal.
Craig, it is I who am flattered by the time you spend reading my blog. It's definitely an honor to have a local celebrity such as yourself visiting my humble home on the web.
As for the lack of Simpsons quotes, I apologize. I guess they have yet to comment upon Wikipedia. You can be sure that when they do, I'll update you on it!
Oh yeah -- nice try with the fake links! It didn't work though, as I make it a habit to look at the status bar of my browser to see just where a link is going to take me before I click on it. You never know what some devious link posters might try to get you to look at. You can never be careful.
Good one, you tricky guy!
Gee, the entire 49th Ward uses smoke & mirrors? I must have missed that meeting. I only see everybody using smoke. That mirrors thing went out with the '80s.
Oh, dear. I can only infer that I referred this kook there with this: this. They vandalized 4'33".
Oh well, Wikipedia is famously resilient. The vandals will tire before the Wikipedians.
I just don't know what "favortives" means. Maybe someone will write a Wikipedia article clearing that up.
Post a Comment