I was aware the use of Wikipedia was swiftly growing, but I did not think of all of the possibilities of where it could go. The site seems boundless. It makes sense though after you get into the article, because it is extremely logical that a next step in our technological maturation would be to have fully functional web encylcopedia that is as trusted as say Encyclopedia Brittanica.
There are both detractors and supporters of the website, and even the academic community is split as to whether Wikipedia is truly gaining ground as a leading source of reliable information. It seems to differ as to who you ask. For instance one professor posed as a "troll" to try to sabotage Wiki because he felt it was easy to do so and needed to be dismissed as a serious site. But after his efforts were thwarted, he is now an active contributor of serious, true information. Other have stated that they feel superior to a site which allows and encourages submissions from, in their mind, unqualified persons, and sometimes disparages "true" academians from posting themselves. Some have even claimed to have posted great information on their matter of expertise, only to find it erased by the Wiki editors. The future of the site is uncertain, seeing as some aspects of the site are scant in knowledge while others rival those of any publication.
I thought it was cool to see how quickly irrelevant and false, and even hard to decipher, statements were taken off the site. I always wondered how that was done and it was nice to figure it out. It was interesting to find out that the site actually has serious creators and editors who work round the clock, and hold events to try and improve the site. It seems like a pretty noble idea. It makes sense though because to be even considered moderately reliable, as most would contend for Wiki, you have to have some sort of immediate overrides in certain situations, seeing as it is so easy to erase and post comments.
No comments:
Post a Comment