In response to this weeks readings I've decided to focus on the article regarding Wikipedia's form of governance. I, for one, believe that the idea of Wikipedia is great. I think it's a great place for someone to get background information on a topic and consequently form their own personal perspective on a situation. Of course I would not solely rely on the information gathered from Wikipedia, for the obvious reason; How do we know what we are reading is 100% accurate? I guess the answer is that we don't.
I think that Wikipedia users need to understand that they must learn how to search beyond Wikipedia. If people don't realise that Wikipedia is only for general use then of course controversy will arise! It's the same concept as someone who's shampoo is giving them dandruff, stop complaining and find something else to use! Although, in saying this I'm not claiming that everything on Wikipedia is fake or unreliable. The founders of Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger (Wikipedia, 2011), work to monitor everything that is entered onto the website. I found this particular quote in the readings, which I think accurately captures the nature of Wikipedia, “Everyone is free, indeed, to propose a contribution, but the people who run the project are equally free to reject the contribution outright … The core task of managing a Commons is to ensure not just the production of resources, but also to prevent its degradation from the addition of low quality material.” (Stadler 2008)
P.S I apologise for referencing Wikipedia, I couldn't help it!
Kostakis, V 2010, First Monday, 'Identifying and understanding the problems of Wikipedia's peer governance: The case of inclusionists verse deletionists', vol. 15, viewed on the 12th September 2011.
Wikipedia: About, 2011, viewed 12 September 2011, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About>
No comments:
Post a Comment