Revision history for TheDarkerSideOfWiki


Revision [18664]

Last edited on 2018-02-27 10:59:48 by DanielleNicholson
Additions:
After doing some research on the reliability of Wikipedia, many Wikipedia articles appeared. Conspiracy? Maybe. Hesitantly, I listened to Wikipedia's advice from above (I know) and found the article [[http://teachinghistory.org/digital-classroom/ask-a-digital-historian/23863|Wikipedia: Credible Research Source or Not?]] which features an answer from the founder of Wikipedia himself, Jimmy Wales. **He does not think researchers should cite Wikipedia.** I think that is a definitive answer in itself, but the article goes on to say that editors do their best to moderate content and fix things that are clearly inaccurate or biased, but they don't always catch everything and certainly do not catch everything in a timely manner. Many people could see the false or biased information before an editor can get a hold of it.
Deletions:
After doing some research on the reliability of Wikipedia, many Wikipedia articles appeared. Conspiracy? Maybe. Hesitantly, I listened to Wikipedia's advice from above (I know) and found the article [[http://teachinghistory.org/digital-classroom/ask-a-digital-historian/23863|Wikipedia: Credible Research Source or Not?]] which features an answer from the founder of Wikipedia himself, Jimmy Wales. **He does not think researchers should cite Wikipedia.** I think that is an a definitive answer in itself, but the article goes on to say that editors do their best to moderate content and fix things that are clearly inaccurate or biased, but they don't always catch everything and certainly do not catch everything in a timely manner. Many people could see the false or biased information before an editor can get a hold of it.


Revision [18550]

Edited on 2018-02-23 09:49:09 by DanielleNicholson
Additions:
In an extremely meta move, Wikipedia (a plethora of authors, I'm sure) published a page called [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_reliable_source|Wikipedia is not a reliable source]], which includes, "Some of the article information might not be accurately true, //which is therefore considered to be wrong//," [my emphasis] as well as a summary of the already-short page, which says, "Do not use a Wikipedia article as a source for another Wikipedia article, even when describing Wikipedia." So meta, so ironic, and yet so accurate.
After doing some research on the reliability of Wikipedia, many Wikipedia articles appeared. Conspiracy? Maybe. Hesitantly, I listened to Wikipedia's advice from above (I know) and found the article [[http://teachinghistory.org/digital-classroom/ask-a-digital-historian/23863|Wikipedia: Credible Research Source or Not?]] which features an answer from the founder of Wikipedia himself, Jimmy Wales. **He does not think researchers should cite Wikipedia.** I think that is an a definitive answer in itself, but the article goes on to say that editors do their best to moderate content and fix things that are clearly inaccurate or biased, but they don't always catch everything and certainly do not catch everything in a timely manner. Many people could see the false or biased information before an editor can get a hold of it.
So, the long and short of it is that we cannot trust Wikipedia.
However, since smaller wikis are not involved with corporations nearly as much as Wikipedia is, I think we can trust them much more and rely on them as a safe place for freedom of speech and expressing new ideas. Wikis also rely on the [[http://erhetoric.org/WeblogsAndWikis/wikka.php?wakka=CreatingSharedKnowledge|sharing of knowledge]] and on collaboration, so it seems there is more of a checks-and-balances system in place on smaller wikis -- there's no buying and selling information there, so I would advise you not to try it. - DanielleNicholson
Deletions:
In an extremely meta move, Wikipedia (a plethora of authors, I'm sure) published a page called [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_reliable_source|Wikipedia is not a reliable source]], which includes, "Some of the article information might not be accurately true, //which is therefore considered to be wrong//," [my emphasis] as well as a summary of the already-short page, which says, "Do not use a Wikipedia article as a source for another Wikipedia article, even when describing Wikipedia."
However, since wikis are not involved with corporations nearly as much as Wikipedia is, I think we can trust them much more and rely on them as a place for freedom of speech.


Revision [18549]

Edited on 2018-02-23 09:28:08 by DanielleNicholson
Additions:
I agree with TonyLien -- the negative sides to Wikipedia are not necessarily a great way to examine the issue of free speech. We can't always count on individuals to be truthful when money is involved, and we can't really blame them. If you have the money to control information online (and, conceivably, the lack of morals that go along with entertaining the thought) why wouldn't you? The reaping of benefits would never end.
In an extremely meta move, Wikipedia (a plethora of authors, I'm sure) published a page called [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_reliable_source|Wikipedia is not a reliable source]], which includes, "Some of the article information might not be accurately true, //which is therefore considered to be wrong//," [my emphasis] as well as a summary of the already-short page, which says, "Do not use a Wikipedia article as a source for another Wikipedia article, even when describing Wikipedia."
However, since wikis are not involved with corporations nearly as much as Wikipedia is, I think we can trust them much more and rely on them as a place for freedom of speech.


Revision [18548]

Edited on 2018-02-23 09:02:39 by DanielleNicholson

No Differences

Revision [18482]

Edited on 2018-02-20 06:22:37 by MorganAdmin
Deletions:
See also
- [[http://quod.lib.umich.edu/n/nmw/5680986.0001.001/1:2/--hyperlinked-society-questioning-connections-in-the-digital?g=dculture;rgn=div1;view=fulltext;xc=1#2.3 | Hyperlink as organizing principle ]]
- [[http://quod.lib.umich.edu/n/nmw/5680986.0001.001/1:1/--hyperlinked-society-questioning-connections-in-the-digital?g=dculture;rgn=div1;view=fulltext;xc=1 | Introduction]]


Revision [18481]

Edited on 2018-02-20 06:22:11 by MorganAdmin
Additions:
----
----
See also
- [[http://quod.lib.umich.edu/n/nmw/5680986.0001.001/1:2/--hyperlinked-society-questioning-connections-in-the-digital?g=dculture;rgn=div1;view=fulltext;xc=1#2.3 | Hyperlink as organizing principle ]]
- [[http://quod.lib.umich.edu/n/nmw/5680986.0001.001/1:1/--hyperlinked-society-questioning-connections-in-the-digital?g=dculture;rgn=div1;view=fulltext;xc=1 | Introduction]]


Revision [18479]

The oldest known version of this page was created on 2018-02-20 06:19:59 by MorganAdmin
Valid XHTML :: Valid CSS: :: Powered by WikkaWiki