This week, Garrett Graff, Sensei of Social Media posed three questions:
Should we trust Wikipedia or an expert-led encyclopedia more?
How could Wikipedia be better set-up to better provide accuracy? Should it be open to everyone or just verified “experts”?
I think Wikipedia is overall good. While, I would never directly cite Wikipedia as a source for any school or professional work, it does provide quick information and the well researched articles provide useful links. However, any move to control Wikipedia by would go against its’ tag: The free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.
As a child I read World Book encyclopedias cover-to-cover. Today a 2008 set costs $1,089!!! This for slickly produced and unsourced articles. I can’t see the cost benefit for non-digital encyclopedias. Can you? I’d rather take my chances with the internet. Interestingly enough two of the most popular “Traditional” encyclopedias have entries in the Wikipedia. (World Book, Encyclopedia Britannica)
I look forward to making my post on Wikipedia for this class.
If all goes well my Wikipedia entry will be on the Rocks, Inc. Ideally, by the time I’ve completed the entry it will be easier to navigate than the organizations homepage. Ultimately, affiliated chapters of the Rocks could update portions of the main entry to detail their specific chartering history and accomplishments.
Time permitting, I told a friend that I would help her update her bio that is currently in violation of Wikipedias content rules. As a part of the “anyone” Wikipedia relies on to improve quality of articles, I can help my friend and help the greater-Wiki community. Anyone can win with Wikipedia…that includes you!