Wikipedia Assignment Instructions
From WRIT-2510 Fall 2006 Wiki
Each Group can post their assignments here. They should include the memo, the final report, and the bibliography (with links/annotations if necessary). You should post them as responses to this main article, unless you think there is a better way to submit them.
Contents |
[edit] Tom, Dustin, Angie, and Yusuf
[edit] Original Memo
Date: September 21, 2006
To: Professor Fernheimer
From: Tom Kujala, Dustin Leung, Angie Ureña and Yusuf Salhhadin
Subject: Detailing the Research Process
Important Dates: Wednesday September 27 Virtual Progress Meeting
Monday October 2 Meet at 10 am to compile information
Wednesday October 4 Submit the final report
Topic Assignments:
Angie: What Wikipedia is, how it works. Familiarize with Wikipedia; find its goals. How it fulfills its goals.
Yusuf / Dustin: Qualities of good entries and genre constraints. Each visit 15 entries come up with own conclusions then come together and agree on a final decision.
Tom: Technical aspects (how to add, link, and format the article). Visit Wikipedia pages describing how the site works technically. Maybe try creating a test page.
Sincerely,
Tom Kujala, Dustin Leung, Angie Urena and Yusuf Salhhadin
CC: WRIT-2510-05
[edit] Final Memo
Date: October 4, 2006
To: Professor Fernheimer
From: Tom Kujala, Dustin Leung, Angie Ureña and Yusuf Salhhadin
Subject: Detailing the Research Process
The first step we took was to divide up the topics into three main categories. The first category contains the basic information about Wikipedia; what is it and how does it work. The second category is made up of the genre constraints and qualities of a good entry on Wikipedia. The third category encompasses the technical aspects of posting on Wikipedia. Each of us took responsibility for one category. Angie researched the basic information on Wikipedia. In her process she created an account on Wikipedia and found most of her information through a hands on approach. Dustin and Yusuf took responsibility for researching the genre constraints and good qualities of entries. Dustin navigated through many entries on Wikipedia and analyzed each to extract the good and sometimes bad qualities of each. Yusuf also found that browsing many Wikipedia entries was the best way to find what made a good entry. Both Dustin and Yusuf looked at least five entries each. Tom was assigned to research the technical aspects of posting on Wikipedia. He looked through many tutorials and experimented in the “Sandbox” as a means of gathering his information.
On September 21, 2006 our group met in class and divided the tasks amongst ourselves and began our individual research. On September 25, 2006, we met briefly in class and discussed the main areas that we wanted to cover and then conducted individual research on our assigned tasks. On September 28, 2006, we updated each other on our individual findings and discussed areas that may need some more information. After our individual research was completed, we met in class on October 2, 2006 to compile our individual information into the group report.
Sincerely,
Tom Kujala, Dustin Leung, Angie Urena and Yusuf Salhhadin
CC: WRIT-2510-05
[edit] Final Report
Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia, founded by the Wikimedia Foundation, which contains articles written in different languages that were created and edited by people all around the world. The information is created collaboratively by volunteers. In order to access the information you don’t need to become a member. On the other hand, if you want to modify the articles or create one, full membership is required.
The wikipedia contains many links to useful resources in the language that you feel most comfortable in. It has an easy to use search engine in which the user is given the opportunity to search for a topic they wish to find information on. Once they do this, they will be transferred to a more specific list of what they might be looking for. Eventually the user will be able to narrow down its search by navigating through the links that the wikipedia provides them with. Additionally, the wikipedia provides people with current events. Once again, links are used to help the user simplify its search. Once the information is found and used you can cite the article appropriately by clicking on the “cite this article” link to find out the information that you need.
In order to modify an article, membership is required. Once you register for the site, you will be able to modify articles as desired. Additionally, you will have the option of being able to create articles on your own. Full instructions on how to do this are specified on the site under the help option.
The primary goal of the wikipedia is to provide free information to its users through a collaborative environment. This is done by allowing the people, both students and adults, to modify the information given as much as possible, allowing this site to be updated with the most current information around the world. The option of which language is preferred is given as an option on the site in order to accommodate the majority of the people.
The genre’s that encompass Wikipedia have no constraints and many constraints at the same time. Wikipedia is dependent upon the users who edit Wikipedia most frequently. In this sense, Wikipedia genre constraints are solely reliant on the users. Often time users’ political, social, and religious views determine the direction that the wiki world can take on.
At first glance, I assumed that some of the more vulgar topics such as porn had no place in “the free encyclopedia”. My thoughts on porn entail nude pictures and video’s of individuals performing acts of an inappropriate nature. Through my search, I soon realized that my assumptions were inaccurate to a certain degree. While my search did not turn up pornography in the form I initially assumed, I found information relating to porn that gave me new insight on the depth of the issue. This is again is a prime example of the limitless possibilities of Wikipedia that astound me.
Wikipedia at first glance, may seem to be an ordinary encyclopedia when in reality it is so much more. While searching for specific information for a certain topic, you may not find that specific information but you can count on a link that will lead you in the right direction. The way in which links are used on the internet to network relevant information is similar to how the human brain operates. We all know that the human brain is so vast and complex that attempting to map such a structure would be a very daunting task to say the least. Wikipedia is the same way, while search engines allow us to locate information easier, this in no way diminishes or attempts to organize the limitless amount of information that we have at our fingertips.
The free encyclopedia is bound and unbound only by the user. Wikipedia is limitless in the area of genre simply because anyone has the ability to post or edit information on any topic they wish. This in a sense is like creating a virtual network or links to every brain on the planet that has internet connectivity. At the same time, the genres are bounded by the interesting fact that many individuals don’t have access to the internet let alone a computer. Similarly, even with the enormous amount of Wikipedia users, there are only about a few hundred people who are responsible for nearly 70% of the editing (Schiff 2006). This has a substantial effect on the infinite nature of Wikipedia in turn placing limits and essentially controlling the flow of information.
Good quality posts are those that follow the specific guidelines given on Wikipedia. One of the guidelines entails a post not going over a specific amount of characters. A quality Wikipedia post should also contain some kind of links or citations to reputable sources. Some posts may contain a persons’ opinion, in which case, how do you cite yourself? Well of course, you do not cite yourself. This would be one of those specific situations where citations are clearly not necessary.
In good quality posts, you want to follow the format, headings/subheadings, bolds/italics, and URL inserts in the correct form. Most of the customizing to the Wikipedia is provided for you by the website itself so if you experiment with the website itself, you can learn how to format to their rules. If the entry is open to a bias audience, try hard not to make it biased. Best way to do this is to focus on a neutral point of view, often you’ll find yourself providing facts instead of your perspective on the subject matter. As a contributor to a resource that people often look to for information, it is your responsibility to provide accurate information, citing your sources if needed. Your entries do not have to be as lengthy as most might be depending on the background you want to provide. Providing examples or supplements to an entry with links are also good things you might want to add. Good, clear visuals are also things you want to include so that the visitor stays interested in what is posted to the Wikipedia if there is any.
After you are logged in, there are many ways to add a new entry to Wikipedia. The best way to do this is to use the search feature located on the left side navigation bar (See Figure 4). This method prevents you from trying to create a duplicate entry. If an entry on your topic appears, then there is no need to add a new page to Wikipedia. However if a page on your desired topic does not exist, Wikipedia will tell you that no articles with that title exist and then it gives you the option to create an article with the title that you searched for. Clicking that link will bring you to an edit page where you can enter the text of your article. One thing to be careful about is that when you search for a topic and click the link to create an article, it will create the article with the title that you searched for.
Another method is to go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Starting_a_new_page where you can enter a title of your choosing in order to create a new article. However the title of an article that you can create has a few restrictions. First, no special characters are allowed including any punctuation marks. Second, your title may not exceed 255 bytes, which may mean less than 255 characters. This is because a character may take more than one byte to be represented. Third, and finally, your title may be case sensitive depending on the context in which you are posing the article. Now comes the hard part, formatting your article.
With a few basic formatting commands, your article will not only look professional, but it will become a functional part of Wikipedia. What makes Wikipedia unique is that each article contains links to other Wikipedia articles that define or describe selected words. For example, if your article contained a sentence with the word ‘Wikipedia’ in it, you would want to include an internal link to the article on Wikipedia. There are two ways to do this: [[Target Page]] and [[Target Page | Display Text]] . The first creates an internal link with ‘Target Page’ displayed as the link text. The second creates an internal link to the ‘Target Page’, but displays ‘Display Text’ as the link text. [[Discussion_of_Bolter_Ch_5-6]] yields Discussion_of_Bolter_Ch_5-6 and [[Discussion_of_Bolter_Ch_5-6 Writing Space Ch. 5 & 6]] yields Writing Space Ch. 5 & 6.
In addition to internal links, Wikipedia gives you the ability to link to external web pages too. This is especially useful when citing your sources. It is recommended that you place all of your external links under an ‘External Links’ heading in bullet form. To include an external link, there are three ways. First you can just type the web address. http://www.rpi.edu/~fernhj/WWWWf06/ yields http://www.rpi.edu/~fernhj/WWWWf06/. Second, you can place the hyperlink within single square brackets. [http://www.rpi.edu/~fernhj/WWWWf06/] yields [1]. This form is especially useful for citing sources throughout your article. A third way is to insert the hyperlink and display text separated by a space within single square brackets. [http://www.rpi.edu/~fernhj/WWWWf06/ Writing to the World Wide Web Fall 2006] yields Writing to the World Wide Web Fall 2006.
With linking accomplished, you are ready to format your article. You can create headings by enclosing desired text within accumulated equal signs. For example ==Heading 1== would create a top level heading, and ===Heading 2=== would create a heading on the next level down. Four equal signs would create a heading on the next level, etc… Headings allow users to easily find the information they are looking for within your article.
Within your headings there are a few ways to format and break up your text. First, you may want to create bold or italic or bolded italic text. To create bold text, enclose the desired text within three single quotation marks, '''Text'''. To create italicized text, enclose the desired text within two single quotation marks, ''Text''. To create bolded italics, enclose the desired text within five single quotation marks, '''''Text'''''.
When writing your article, you may also want to include a bulleted or numbered list, and Wikipedia allows you to do this. To create a bulleted list, place desired text next to an asterisk ’*’. Each single asterisk indicates a new bullet in the list. Two or more asterisks indicates a deeper level. The same follows for numbered lists, except they use the pound ’#’ sign (See table below). With this information you are ready to create an article, link from it, format it properly and add it to Wikipedia.
| Code | Display |
|---|---|
| *This is a bullet
**This is one level deeper ***Yet another level deeper **This bullet resumes the previous (second) level *This is another bullet |
|
| #This is a numbered list
##This is one level deeper ###Yet another level deeper ##This resumes numbering at the second level #This is the next number |
|
[edit] Bibliography
"Anime." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 27 Sept. 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anime>
"Help: Editing." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sept. 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing>
"Help: Page Name." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sept. 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Page_name>
"Help: Starting a new page." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sept. 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Starting_a_new_page>
"Leet" Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 4 Oct 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leet>
"MobileMan Glossary." MobileMAN. 25 Sept. 2006. <http://mobileman.projects.supsi.ch/glossary.html>
"Narcolepsy" Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 4 Oct 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcolepsy>
"Pornography." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 27 Sept. 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porn>
"Punji stick." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 4 Oct 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punjee_stick>
"Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 4 Oct 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rensselaer_Polytechnic_Institute>
Schiff, Stacy. "Know It All." 24 July 2006. The New Yorker: Fact. 11 Oct 2006. <http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060731fa_fact>
"Shark Island, Cronulla Beach" Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 4 Oct 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shark_Island%2C_Cronulla_Beach>
"Sign in / create account." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sept. 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&type=signup>
"Wiki." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 25 Sept. 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki>
"Wikipedia:Username." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sept. 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:USERNAME#Inappropriate_usernames>
"Wikipedia: Your First Article." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sept. 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Your_first_article>
"Xbox." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 27 Sept. 2006. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox>
[edit] Jim, Brandon, Nate, Alex
[edit] Original Memo
Date: September 21, 2006
To: Professor Fernheimer
From: Alex Clement, Jim Johnson, Brandon Ng, Nate DeSimone
Subject: Group Research Process
Group Questions to address:
Jim: What is Wikipedia?
Nate: How does it work?
Alex: What is a good post? Each person has at least two examples and will also discuss in group
Alex: What is a bad post? Each person has at least two examples and will also discuss in group
Brandon: What are the genre constraints of Wikipedia?
Requirements:
Minimum of one page double spaced of information per person on the information noted above with your name attached.
Deadlines:
September 28, 2006 - Rough drafts shown to each other in class. Critiques given on each draft by the group.
October 2, 2006 - Meet in class to finish assembly of the paper
Sincerely,
Alex Clement, Jim Johnson, Brandon Ng, Nate DeSimone
CC: WRIT-2510-05
[edit] Final Memo
Date: October 1st, 2006
To: Professor Fernheimer
From: Alex Clement, Nate DeSimone, Jim Johnson, Brandon Ng
Subject: Research procedures for Wikipedia entry assignment
The creation of the Wikipedia analysis was a group effort that involved each of us analyzing different facets of Wikipedia, writing up our conclusions, and then coming together to integrate these ideas. We found that this accelerated the writing process, but it came at the sacrifice of consistency across the report. To counter this, we had a meeting in which we critiqued each other’s work and came to a final decision on what we wanted to include in the report.
The area in which we focused most of our efforts on was deciding what constituted a good and a bad post. We felt this was the most important because it combined a lot of the other aspects of writing a Wikipedia entry, including what some of the genre constraints a remediated encyclopedia such as Wikipedia must face. Reviewing a variety of articles on Wikipedia allowed us to get a more holistic view of the online encyclopedia, and this helped us in deciding what kind of post students will want to create when individual wiki posts are done.
The remaining portion of the report focused on some of the technical aspects of Wikipedia and the history of the encyclopedia. Most of the research on these areas focused on the policy and guidelines sections of Wikipedia, of which there was a significant amount of information. Part of the difficulty in writing this section of the report was deciding what restrictions and procedures presented by Wikipedia were most relevant to the class and putting these in the report.
Overall, the report provides a general introduction to Wikipedia and an analysis of what restrictions and guidelines are in place that will be important to take into consideration when doing our individual posts.
Sincerely,
Alex Clement, Nate DeSimone, Jim Johnson, Brandon Ng
CC: WRIT-2510-05
[edit] Final Report
What is Wikipedia?
Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia started in January of 2001 that is created and edited mostly by its users. It contains articles written in many different languages. As of September 28, 2006 the English site has over 1,404,000 articles and over 5,000,000 articles total. Currently, Wikipedia is funded by the Wikimedia Foundation. Its fourth quarter 2005 cost were over $300,000. Wikipedia was created as “an effort to create and distribute a multilingual free encyclopedia of the highest possible quality to every single person on the planet in their own language.” This is not to say that this is true yet. There is still much controversy surrounding Wikipedia.
At first glance, Wikipedia seems to be a very good source for information. However, Wikipedia does not go without criticism. The general idea of an encyclopedia created and edited mostly by its users and its general lack of censorship lead to numerous problems such as vandalism, reliability and articles written in bias. Wikipedia does try to combat these problems. Administrators can close certain articles to anonymous editing that have been recently vandalized as well as take other measures to protect the articles.
Along with these weaknesses, Wikipedia does have a few strong points. Due to its broad audience, there tend to be articles about subjects not available anywhere else. These include encyclopedia like articles for pop culture items such as popular music and TV shows. Wikipedia’s ability to be updated frequently allows for these articles to contain the most up to date information. Some get updated the day a new episode airs.
How does Wikipedia work?
Wikipedia uses its own in house software system called Mediawiki, which they license for redistribution under the GPL. Mediawiki is using the PHP programming language, and uses Apache with the PHP modules installed. It also makes use of the MySQL database engine. It has a basic macro based editing language and includes support for templates and variables. There are five Linux server clusters around the world, each with more than 100 servers attached. These servers render articles as they are requested, and they also provide the online mechanisms for editing articles. Before any request actually goes to these servers however, it goes to a front end of two cache servers. These servers store pre-rendered copies of the most commonly requested articles, so they won’t need to be recomputed if they are requested again. If the requested article is not cached, then load balancing servers will decide which server will render the article and instruct that server to do so. Most of their funding goes to the purchasing and maintenance of computer hardware, their average costs are $310,000 per quarter.
What are the genre constraints of a Wikipedia entry?
What genre constraints can one place on an encyclopedia which is authored and edited by the world? This is a question one might ask when considering the immense and diverse collection of knowledge held by six and a half billion people. However, although it may seem that Wikipedia has no genre boundaries, the very fact that there are so many articles introduces issues of how to control and manage the constant flow of data seen on the online encyclopedia. There are two primary audiences to take into account when evaluating the genre constraints of Wikipedia – that of the class members reading the article and of the rules and regulations that exist to regulate the site. In order to successfully write a Wikipedia entry, both of these audiences must be constantly kept in mind during the writing process.
Wikipedia’s site offers a plethora of rules and regulations on what content can be posted and how it should be posted. When making the decision on what subject matter to use for an article, it should be noted that some of the items which Wikipedia disallows include autobiographies, personal attacks, dictionary definitions, propanda, isolated files and images, personal webpages, and any article which violates the Five Pillars of Wikipedia. These five core rules and regulations form the foundation upon which all content in Wikipedia is governed by and cover issues of exactly what Wikipedia is to the code of conduct to follow when utilizing the site. One of the key items to note when considering whether or not an individual is following the governance of Wikipedia is that none of the rules specifically disallow open editing and contribution, as this is the fundamental principle behind Wikipedia.
Inasmuch as Wikipedia encourages a wide variety of topics, one must also remember the academic environment in which the article is being written. This means that any article which deals with inappropriate content or content which is not relevant to a significantly sized group should not be used. Inappropriate content can be defined as any topic which would not normally be discussed in class. The target audience for the topic should also have at least 30 to 50 members.
What makes a good and a bad post?
Wikipedia breaks their section on “writing better articles” into four major categories: layout, style, thinking of the reader, and using clear, precise and accurate terms. They go into great detail in every section as to things they think everyone should remember as they write and edit articles.
In respect to layout, articles should have introductions, paragraphs, the use of proper headings, images, appendices, and should stay under a 32KB size if possible (Writing Better Articles). There are more specific details on the page, but if these general layout concerns are addressed as a post is being written, then the post will be more easily understood by readers.
Wikipedia offers two different styles that an author should write their articles in; those being news style and summary style. Both of these styles are correct, and Wikipedia does not really recommend one over the other, as long as they work well with the article. News style is referred to as the “inverted pyramid” and answers the questions of who, what, when, where, and why. The article should then provide less important information further into the writing. (Writing Better Articles). Summary style is very similar to new style with the exception of answering the major questions quickly in a matter of sentences. In general, summary style answers these questions in a breakdown of topics (Writing Better Articles). Essentially, the difference is a breakdown into topic paragraphs versus sentences. Both of these styles can be used freely, with Wikipedia leaving it up to the author to make the decision on which style to use.
The next section covers thinking of the reader and states a number of things that any author should keep in mind when writing to the World Wide Web. These ideas include stating the obvious, a short and strong introduction, trying to keep within one language if possible, and the careful use of color (Writing Better Articles). These simple things can significantly affect the way in which an article is perceived.
The last section Wikipedia talks about is “using clear, precise and accurate terms”. There are a lot of specifics that are written on Wikipedia that will not be reviewed here, but the main ideas focus on stating ideas in ways which any reader would be able to understand without any previous knowledge of the topic and making sure that these ideas stay on topic (Writing Better Articles). In general, an author should be considerate to his audience by not making blanketed statements, explaining the “self evident” things, and using accurate information.
From what we found after viewing multiple posts, we came up with a number of criteria that separate a good and a bad post. For the most part, good posts include multiple outside references, research information about books and other areas of research, pictures, a content break down, links with the text to other areas, are typo free, supply accurate information, and have a good introduction. Lower quality posts are those that generally cover less popular topics, which results in little information about the topic being available. The lack of pictures, references, and poor breakdown of information is a general sign of a bad post. We found that it is more difficult to find bad posts on Wikipedia; the more popular posts are viewed by more people and, as a result, edited more frequently.
Following every suggestion of formation that Wikipedia suggest does not guarantee that your post will be a great one. It is important to keep in mind that all of the above listed information is suggested and not concrete law. Consequently, even posts that do not follow these guidelines may still be considered great articles. The most important thing when posting to Wikipedia is remembering to take the audience into consideration and presenting unbiased and accurate information to the public.
When adding an article to Wikipedia, it is important to properly format the content. Wikipedia uses an in-house formatting language which allows individuals to add images, make font changes, and do a number of other design changes. There is a detailed description of this markup language available at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_edit_a_page
Wikipedia has made creating a new entry simple. In order to create a new article, there are a couple of available methods that can be utilized. A user can visit the URL:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Starting_a_new_page#Starting_a_page_through_the_URL
And type in the title of the new page. Another method a user has available to them is to type their topic into the main search box. If the topic is not already available, there is a link on the search results page which says “You can create this article or request it”.
Examples of good posts
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shotgun_house
- Includes photos, explanation, floor plans (architectural), variations, see also, Reference & external links, See also Section
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medal_of_Honor
- Photos, explanation, diagrams, timeline, origins, references & external links
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whale_song
- Photos, explanation, diagrams, timeline, origins, references & external links, media section
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_colonization
- Photo, lots of recourses, many other references, long list of content
Examples of bad posts
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_a_Bad%2C_Bad%2C_Bad%2C_Bad_Movie
- No references, no content break down, no real pictures, not overly relative links
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Your_fly_is_open
- No references, small article, poor tone
[edit] Bibliography
"Medal of Honor." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 3 Oct 2006, 15:47 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 4 Oct 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Medal_of_Honor&oldid=79263773>.
"RinkWorks." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 26 Sep 2006, 01:02 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 4 Oct 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=RinkWorks&oldid=77821840>.
"Shotgun house." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 26 Sep 2006, 23:09 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 4 Oct 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shotgun_house&oldid=77999180>.
"Space colonization." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 1 Oct 2006, 18:50 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 4 Oct 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Space_colonization&oldid=78913270>.
"Whale song." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 11 Sep 2006, 05:40 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 4 Oct 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Whale_song&oldid=75046661>.
"Wikipedia: Guide to writing better articles" Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 30 Sep 2006, 03:47 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 30 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_writing_better_articles>.
"Wikipedia: Five Pillars" Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 28 Sep 2006, 07:47 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars>.
"Your fly is open." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 12 Sep 2006, 15:30 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 4 Oct 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Your_fly_is_open&oldid=75306437>.
[edit] Ellen, Dave, Whitney, Carol
[edit] Original Memo
Date: 10/2/06
To: Professor Fernheimer
From: Ellen McNamara, Dave Malarik, Carol Scalice, Whitney Naslund
Subject: Group Research Process
- Thursday, September 28
o All group members review postings to determine what the common themes of “good” postings are o All group members review themes of credible citations. Do the authors cite sources? What types of sources are cited? Do they come from online sites or essays? o All group members review sites to determine what makes a posting look credible in terms of content and layout. What language conventions are used? How is the page formatted? o Criteria to be combined into one document on this date
- Monday, October 2
o All group members to come up with list of what should be included in a final submission of a “good” article. Take outline of posting criteria and extend this to include the overall writing process. o Compile full requirements and criteria into a single document for group submission.
- Wednesday, October 4
o Group research is due, 9am
Sincerely,
Ellen McNamara Dave Malarik Carol Scalice Whitney Naslund
CC: WRIT-2510-05
[edit] Final Memo
Date: 10/2/06
To: Professor Fernheimer
From: Ellen McNamara, Dave Malarik, Carol Scalice, Whitney Naslund
Subject: Group Research Process
Our group used methods that allowed us to get things done quickly and proficiently. In the beginning we had some difficulty interpreting the assignment, which slowed us down considerably. Once we knew exactly what to do, all four of us individually came up with criteria for a good post. Then we brought our ideas together and divvied up more specified work. For example, Ellen was in charge of the instructions on how to post, while Jeff and Whitney worked on developing the different genre constraints. Carol acted as a liaison and put all of the ideas together. After an outline was constructed, the final pieces were put together. Carol transformed the outline into a report and then Jeff and Whitney revised it. Ellen was then put in charge of posting the actual report.
During our research we came up with a solid basis of a good entry. We stated that a good post contains clean content without vandalism, proper citations including both internal and external links, supporting images, correct grammar, and coherent sectional breakdowns. We also explored major problems and genre constraints when searching for good posts. Working together, we managed to think of a couple examples to show exactly the mistakes that Wikipedia presents.
Our synopsis and final report turned out better than we all thought it would. Splitting up the tasks the way we did was very efficient. Specifying jobs for each person made it so we all knew exactly what was supposed to be done. It also pressured each member to do their part in order to prevent the group from slowing down. By working both together and individually we were able to add many different viewpoints to the report. Also, collaborating allowed us to remain on the same track and correctly interpret the assignment. In some cases, there were a couple of us confused and the others were able to keep the ones in the dark up to date.
Sincerely,
Ellen McNamara Dave Malarik Carol Scalice Whitney Naslund
CC: WRIT-2510-05
[edit] Final Report
Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia and, as a means to that end, an online community of people interested in building a high-quality encyclopedia in a spirit of mutual respect. The encyclopedia is constantly developing as people make posts on informative subjects. Once a post has been created other Wikipedians (researchers, editors, or just general users) can review the information posted and are welcome to edit, add, or subtract from the original article. MediaWiki is a software application used by Wikipedia to help correct any editorial mistakes found on the site.
Posting to Wikipedia is a simple process, which can be performed by any internet user. If you are not a register user, then you must first create a user name and password at wikipedia.com. Once the registration process is complete, sign in with the user name and password selected and search for a topic of your choice. If the topic is found then the page will come up into the viewing window. To modify a section the user simply needs to click on the “Edit” tag associated with a section and then make the additions or corrections in the textbox provided. Once the modifications are complete the user can either directly save the changes or preview them first to check for any unintended output. If the topic does not show up and the user would like to create it the instructions are equally simple. There is a section called “Create This Article”, which the user can select by clicking on it. A large textbox will appear to allow for page editing. Here the author can type the contents of his or her posting into the box and click “Save Page” when finished. This will create the intended page with the contents that were entered by the author. Under the “Help” category there is a section on the editing process, entitled “Editing Wikipedia”. This tutorial provides step-by-step instructions on editing and content generation.
An extensive knowledge of Wikipedia is not required for editing simple posts. All that is required is clicking the “Edit” tag in the section of the page that you would like to edit as stated above. If you would like to simply edit the text of that section, you can do so as you would with any text. If you would like to create a new category (categories are shown as bold topic name with a line breaking the page directly below it) you will use the following format:
(= =Category Title= =)
A subcategory is created by simply adding another “=” to the boundaries of the text as can be seen below:
(= = =Subcategory Title= = =)
After the category or subcategory is created, text can be added simply by typing as you would any word processing program. One other useful tool for editing simple posts is creating hyperlinks. This is done by placing the entire link inside brackets as shown below:
With these simple skills, you could spend countless hours on Wikipedia adding your own insight to existing entries and creating ones of your own. There are several genre constraints associated with a dynamic encyclopedia such as Wikipedia; including lack of credibility, bias, offensive content, and difficulty in finding specific items. Vandalism is a frequent issue plaguing Wikipedia. Just as there are graffiti artists in cities, there are individuals on the internet who vandalize articles on this site. This detracts from the credibility of Wikipedia postings, because there is no way for the common user to distinguish the inserted text of a malicious user from the intended text of the author. Wikipedia does take steps to prevent vandalism through IP (Internet Protocol) Blocking and by creating groups to monitor edits. Unfortunately, there is no way for Wikipedia to determine in advance what users will vandalize articles. Therefore, the primary defense must be to wait until the postings are edited and take steps to correct the changes and prevent the malicious user from causing further damage to the page. Another credibility concern comes into play with the fact that anyone can make posts to Wikipedia. As a result common users who have no knowledge of a topic are open to post erroneous content on a subject they know nothing about. Because the volume of Wikipedia users if large and variable erroneous posts are often edited and corrected in a relatively short period of time, especially on topics of social interest. However; there is no guarantee that at the information posted is accurate at all times. There are often posts on issues such as conspiracy theories and rumors as well. For example, the posting on “John F Kennedy” references the conspiracy theories related to his death. Bias is another constraint affecting Wikipedia postings. There are no standards for what motivates a user to make a post, and occasionally authors post content with intent to persuade their audience on a given topic. Writing biased articles does not necessarily have to be intentional or created with the intent or persuasion. Often, inexperienced writers will generate content based off of their own thoughts or experiences, without realizing that some of the issues raised are merely opinions and not necessarily facts on the topic. Users can comment that they feel an article shows bias, for example the “War on Terrorism” article states at the top “A Wikipedian has expressed the opinion that this article is unbalanced.” Wikipedia does not make any attempts within the organization to make the articles unbiased; however, if the fact is brought to their attention they will alert users in the aforementioned manner. Offensive content is another challenge Wikipedia is forced to deal with using an open posting system. Therefore, seemingly innocent topics could be linked to material some users may find offensive. For example, searching for the article “Tossing Salad” automatically redirects a user to an article entitled “Anal-oral contact”. If the user was a chef at a nunnery who was looking for salad articles, then having their search redirected to this article could be extremely offensive. Chances are that if the same user had been researching materials on salads in a regular encyclopedia then this connection would never have been established and the user would not have reached the offensive material. This scenario also demonstrates the potential difficulty in searching for intended subject material. Unless the user knows the exact titles of the article he or she is looking for, then it is possible that the person will be redirected to another article that is irrelevant to the search. The wide variety of articles provided in Wikipedia’s online encyclopedia warrant search strings to be very explicit in order to reach an intended article. These constraints cause Wikipedia to be set apart from other online encyclopedias and have a profound impact on how the articles are perceived as credible sources of information.
There are many characteristics of a good entry; including, but not limited to, clean content without vandalism, proper citations including both internal and external links, supporting images, correct grammar, and coherent sectional breakdowns. Due to the open nature of posting on the site, there is a large likelihood for vandalism on Wikipedia. A good posting is well-monitored and free from malicious editing. Another quality of a good post is the amount of public interest and discussion sparked by the topic. This can be seen in the number of edits made to the page and the volume of posts on the associated discussion pages. Topics with a large number of postings by other users are generally considered topics of public interest and warrant a good entry. For example, the posting on “Sex” has a very long revision history with the option to view the next five-hundred revisions. The discussions page for this topic has two archives linked to it, because the page had exceeded the maximum allowable size. A good posting also has footnotes, references, and/or links to credible sources. The sources listed in these sections should be to books or other sources that the audience recognizes as credible. Books referenced should generally be some kind of scholarly literature or citations from encyclopedias. Citations from other internet articles should be associated with websites synonymous with credibility on the topic in question. For example, the posting on “Carl Lewis” references Sports Illustrated and Track & Field News. Another example of this would be the “Coca Cola” posting referencing the actual coca-cola website or the “Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute” posting referencing data on the institute’s own website. Citations can also be made within text in a good posting. Topics or individuals discussed within the text can be linked to the articles associated with it. This enables a reader to quickly cross-reference the person, place or thing. When applicable, a good posting will provide readers with supporting images; including photographs, charts, tables or graphs. These images should be relevant to the topics being discussed and have appropriate captions crediting the source of the image as well as a description of what it is. Images should be placed close to the associated text and should be visible without the reader needing to scroll to the right to view it. For example, the posting on “Graph Theory” contains a picture representation of a graph complete with a caption describing what is contained in the image for users who are unfamiliar with the topic. Good postings also maintain proper grammar and are free of typos. The posting on “Frank Scalice” is one example of how poor grammar and typos causes the posting to not be good. In both the title of the posting and within most of the article the spelling of the last name properly spelled “Scalice”, yet in the introductory sentence the author spells the name “Scalise”. Mistakes of this nature take away from the credibility of the post. Layout is another important factor in the creation of a good Wikipedia post. Good postings contain short and concise titles and subtitles at the top of the page. Shortly following the title, and optionally the subtitle, should be a brief introduction to the topic being discussed. The body of the posting should be broken down into coherent sections that, when applicable, appear in chronological order. There should also be a contents list of some type with a table of contents to allow for easy page navigation. For example, the posting on “Areas of Mathematics” contains separate sections for various areas such as Algebra, Analysis, and Geometry. Along with the sectional breakdown based on discipline, there is a table of contents just below the introduction to directly link the user to that section. Another characteristic of a good posting with regard to layout is the consistency of alignment. Good pages will maintain a consistent alignment, generally left aligned. For example, the posting on the topic “Long Jump” generally maintains a left justified alignment. However, at the very bottom of the page there is a table that is center justified. This table appears to be displaced from the rest of the page, because it does not follow the same conventions as the rest of the preceding article. The aforementioned characteristics are only common themes of good entries. As a whole, what makes a good posting truly relies on the intended audience of the article.
As simple of an idea as the Wikipedia is, there are countless opinions on what should be written, how it should be written, what opinion should be presented as the truth, and so forth. With everybody in the world having differing opinions, it could be said that there is no correct answer to what makes a good Wikipedia post. However, under the guns of differing opinions and points of view, Wikipedia is surviving and thriving with little controversy surrounding its name. It is because of mutual understandings of the World Wide Web community and the devotion of a handful of user that Wikipedia is keeping credibility in a world of differing opinions. In simple terms, a good Wikipedia post depends upon the mind of he/she who is making the post and the millions who are reviewing it.
[edit] Bibliography
• "American Civil War." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 28 Sep 2006, 06:58 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=American_Civil_War&oldid=78260939>. • "American Revolution." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 27 Se 2006, 17:58 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/ index.php?title=American_Revolution&oldid=78142984>. • "Anal-oral contact." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 28 Sep 2006, 19:42 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 30 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anal-oral_contact&oldid=78359992>. • "Athletics (track and field)." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 26 Sep 2006, 00:12 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Athletics_%28track_and_field%29&oldid=77814501>. • "Areas of mathematics." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 27 Sep 2006, 15:09 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Areas_of_mathematics&oldid=78113691>. • "Bill Clinton." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 28 Sep 2006, 06:00 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bill_Clinton&oldid=78255375>. • "Carl Lewis." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 27 Sep 2006, 22:23 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carl_Lewis&oldid=78189858>. • "Chocolate." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 28 Sep 2006, 10:13 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chocolate&oldid=78278622>. • "Coca-Cola." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 28 Sep 2006, 14:31 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Coca-Cola&oldid=78306443>. • "Colosseum." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 28 Sep 2006, 02:12 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Colosseum&oldid=78227710>. • "Detroit, Michigan." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 27 Sep 2006, 17:23 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Detroit%2C_Michigan&oldid=78136774>. • "Detroit Red Wings." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 25 Sep 2006, 20:43 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Detroit_Red_Wings&oldid=77781537>. • "Finding Nemo." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 26 Sep 2006, 23:30 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Finding_Nemo&oldid=78002328>. • "Frank Scalice." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 28 Sep 2006, 14:46 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_Scalice&oldid=78308753>. • "Graph theory." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 26 Sep 2006, 19:16 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 1 Oct 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Graph_theory&oldid=77957002>. • "Internet Movie Database." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 28 Sep 2006, 11:08 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Internet_Movie_Database&oldid=78283767>. • "John F. Kennedy." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 29 Sep 2006, 15:42 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 30 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_F._Kennedy&oldid=78517792>. • "Leonardo da Vinci." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 28 Sep 2006, 13:52 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Leonardo_da_Vinci&oldid=78302159>. • "Long jump." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 11 Sep 2006, 15:42 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Long_jump&oldid=75110716>. • "Macomb Township, Michigan." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 22 Sep 2006, 12:51 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Macomb_Township%2C_Michigan&oldid=77159992>. • "Mighty Mouse." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 26 Sep 2006, 14:32 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mighty_Mouse&oldid=77909760>. • "New York Giants." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 26 Sep 2006, 15:47 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=New_York_Giants&oldid=77921160>. • "Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 28 Sep 2006, 01:37 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rensselaer_Polytechnic_Institute&oldid=78222276>. • "Sex." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 27 Sep 2006, 02:10 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sex&oldid=78025986>. • "War on Terrorism." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 28 Sep 2006, 12:10 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=War_on_Terrorism&oldid=78289682>. • Wikipedia: What Wikipedia Is Not. Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not. 28 Sept. 2006
[edit] Adam, Andrew, Ankit, Steven (a.k.a The A-Team and that other guy)
[edit] Original Memo
Date: September 22, 2006
To: Professor Janice Fernheimer
From: Adam Lasek, Ankit Modh, Andrew Wu, Steven Zeng
Subject: Wikipedia Group Posting
Break down of work:
1. What is Wikipedia? (Adam) 1) The history of Wikipedia? 2) What is the goal/purpose of Wikipedia? 3) What is the community that uses Wikipedia? 4) What is the community of the contributors to WIkipedia?
2. How does Wikipedia work? (Steven) 1) How do you find what you need? 2) How do you post? 3) How do you edit a post? 4) How do the discussion boards work?
3. What are the genre constraints? (Ankit and Andrew)
4. What are the qualities of a good entry? (Assembled by Everyone)
Each part should be done by October 2nd where it will be compiled into one paper. For the last part, 5-10 articles should be looked at and criteria listed for a good entry.
Sincerely,
Adam Lasek, Ankit Modh, Andrew Wu, Steven Zeng
CC: WRIT-2510-05
[edit] Final Memo
Date: October 2nd, 2006
To: Professor Janice Fernheimer
From: Adam Lasek, Ankit Modh, Andrew Wu, Steven Zeng
Subject: Wikipedia Group Posting
In given the assignment to research Wikipedia and write about we decided to break the project into sections. The work was broken up into four main parts; “What is Wikipedia? (written by Adam), “how does Wikipedia work? (Steven), “what are the genre constraints? (Ankit and Andrew), and “what are the qualities of a good entry? (all group members) .
Each topic also contained subtopics. Adam was responsible for the history of Wikipedia, its goal/purpose, and the community of readers and contributors. Steven was responsible for informing readers of how to use Wikipedia. This includes the subtopics of how to find information, how to post, how to edit a post, and how to use the discussion boards. Ankit and Andrew were responsible for talking about the genre constraints. Information on this topic can include accuracy of information, no paid staff, and the posting of pop culture just to name a few.
After the project was split up, we created bullet points of items to be to be included in the report depending on the breakdown. This proved to be effective because we each were able to see what the others group were planning to write so that we can all be on the same page.
We then created our own subsections. After we had each written our specific parts, we came together on October 2nd to combine them all. We worked together to try to mesh the writing and paragraphs together with the best organization possible. The specific parts turned out to fit well and we believe we have met all of the criteria asked for in this assignment.
Sincerely,
Adam Lasek, Ankit Modh, Andrew Wu, Steven Zeng
Cc: WWWW Section 61376
[edit] Report
In past years when someone wanted to find information about The Roman Catholic Church, research would be done by trekking to the library and using books. In today’s world, most of us would log in to the internet and Google for the information. However, that Google search on the Roman Catholic Church will lead you to Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit. While this new technology allows us to obtain limitless information instantly, there are considerations to be made as to what good content is and how it should be posted.
When Jimmy Wales created the website in 2001, it was originally called Nupedia (“History of Wikipedia” ) but was changed later on to Wikipedia and turned non-profit in 2003 (Schiff). The site now runs on donations. Wales describes Wikipedia’s mission as “to distribute a free encyclopedia to every single person on the planet in their own language.” Surprisingly, Wales is so far extremely successful in his mission. The website has about 1,400,000 posted articles available in over 200 languages (Schiff). Any person that can access the internet can view these pages for free thus making the Wikipedia community very large. Most of the people are there to find information, and post information honestly. In fact, according to Stacy Schiff of the New Yorker, out of 200,000 registered users only two percent or 3300 of these people are responsible for 70% of articles posted.
Wikipedia was developed with the intention of collaborative writing, quite similar to the idea behind Linux’s open source development where users can edit the code of the program where they see fit. Users potentially have the power to change anything they want. That includes writing “You suck” on George W. Bush’s page. Of course, folks on Wikipedia are watching out for these kinds of vandalism and policies have been created to suspend or even terminate the IP addresses of individuals caught vandalizing. So, how does this all work? Searching for a topic simply requires entering a key word in the search box. Posting a new article requires signing up for an account. There are other benefits to creating an account such as the ability to edit “semi-locked” articles (pages that have been locked due to vandalism), change the names of articles, and post pictures. The more you post and contribute to Wikipedia, the greater the chance for you to become an administrator, giving you even more authority (“Why create an account?”). In addition, Wikipedia has a community portal for users who are genuinely interested in contributing to the site – with links detailing articles in need of a touch up or key terms that require an actual article.
Contributing to Wikipedia is easy for the novice computer user. To edit a page, simply click on edit tab at the top of the page or the edit link after a particular section of text in an article and change the information. Organization such as tables and bullets can be set up using a special “wikitext” language which includes the usage of html and other markup tags. This has been created by the MediaWiki Foundation to make it easily editable, even for users who have no knowledge of computer languages(“Wikitext”). You can also talk about changes that should be made to an article on the discussion page (could be reached by clicking on the discussion tab). History of changes made to an article can be found by clicking on the history tab. Lastly, to create an entirely new article, you can go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Starting_a_new_page, enter your title, and click create page. This will take you to a page where you can edit the text of your new page as long as you are logged into your account.
While Wikipedia has limitless potential for information, there are many drawbacks to this type of genre. First and foremost, this information can only be accessed by those with a computer and an internet connection. This might not be a huge setback in America or on the RPI campus where computers can be found just about anywhere except a bathroom, many developing countries simply do not have the computer availability to access this information on a regular basis. A major flaw with this concept of encyclopedia is that information on Wikipedia can be inaccurate do to the fact that this content is highly changeable. For example, I was able to put my name on the April 17 page (my birthday) under births as an American Super Hero, which stayed on there for a few days (“April 17”). This leads to the fact that the Wikipedia community is just that, a community. There is no paid staff and it is a complete non-profit organization which runs on donations. While this may be a benefit to those who believe in the good intentions of man, there is no reward for quality of product, an idea that capitalism is built upon.
Additionally, the average person becomes the expert. A group of people can keep slanted information posted on the Wiki, as long as they are persistent. Plagiarism also becomes an issue because anyone can post copy written or stolen ideas and statements onto the board without proper citation and credit given. Rather than an academic encyclopedia, Wikipedia has turned somewhat into a current events message board. For example, minutes after Terrell Owens was thought to attempt suicide and the story broke out, a new section was created on his Wikipedia entry and information not even confirmed was posted (“Terrell Owens”). While it is great to find this gossip from a news outlet, an encyclopedia should be not be a source for tabloid stories rather a source of history and academic information.
For many of the above reasons, criteria for a good article posting should be established. Wikipedia states that an article should be “well written, comprehensive, factually accurate, neutral and stable” (“What is a featured article?”) however, there is more to be determined. The article should definitely be well written using the conventions of Standard English, but also be organized and linked properly. While an article should be comprehensive it should not be too extensive to include unnecessary details. The page should be properly cited and have well documented sources to prove authenticity, authorship, and accuracy. Wherever available, useful images and tables should be included along with where they came from. The content should not be biased and represent one point of view, rather encompassing all angles. Lastly, articles should not be news stories. That should be left to the news outlets. An encyclopedia binds together articles of academic interest, not tabloid or popular culture stories.
Wikipedia has proven to be quick yet slightly untrustworthy site for information. Much can be done to improve the still young site. Using the criteria established, we can ensure that future articles do not exhibit many of the drawbacks mentioned.
[edit] Bibliography
"April 17." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 2 Oct 2006, 22:13 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 4 Oct 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=April_17&oldid=79129774>.
“Help:Starting a new page” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 2 Oct 2006, 22:13 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 4 Oct 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Starting_a_new_page>
"History of Wikipedia." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 28 Sep 2006, 14:33 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 28 Sep 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_Wikipedia&oldid=78306707>.
Schiff, Stacy. “Know it All.” The New Yorker. 28 Sep 2006, 10:55 UTC. http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060731fa_fact
"Terrell Owens." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 2 Oct 2006, 14:47 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 2 Oct 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Terrell_Owens&oldid=79046485>.
“What is a featured article?” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 2 Oct 2006, 22:13 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 4 Oct 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_is_a_featured_article%3F>
“Why create an account?” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 2 Oct 2006, 14:47 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 2 Oct 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Why_create_an_account%3F>.
"Wikitext." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 23 Sep 2006, 14:44 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 4 Oct 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikitext&oldid=77361021>.
