At its core, Wikipedia is not just a reference work but also an online community that has built itself a bureaucracy of sorts — one that, in response to well-publicized problems with some entries, has recently grown more elaborate. It has a clear power structure that gives volunteer administrators the authority to exercise editorial control, delete unsuitable articles and protect those that are vulnerable to vandalism.
***
To some critics, protection policies make a mockery of the "anyone can edit" notion.
"As Wikipedia has tried to improve its quality, it's beginning to look more and more like an editorial structure," said Nicholas Carr, a technology writer who recently criticized Wikipedia on his blog. "To say that great work can be created by an army of amateurs with very little control is a distortion of what Wikipedia really is."
Sunday, June 18, 2006
The evolution of Wikipedia
The New York Times reports on how, due to abuse, Wikipedia is change its editing policies:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Ted, you shouldn't directly accuse anyone -- including Justin -- of being gay. It's better if you just insinuate it.
This is why editing should be left to the professionals.
I <3 Wikipedia!
Me too. It is one of the best sources of information available -- and it is pretty gosh darn accurate and unbiased.
I was referring to Comment #1.
or rather the commentator. Anyway, I don't particularly care for sites that aren't particularly useful. I wasn't going to suggest taking Wikipedia away from those who are amused by it.
May I delete my comments Dara? I talk too much when I have too much stress in my life.
Ted, you know that the most homophobic people are the most likely to actually be gay, right?
Debby, why would you want to do that?
I may be losing my mind due to non-blog-related issues. I trust you to monitor my comments.
Post a Comment