Wikipedia, an extremely well known and popularly used website amongst an abundance of high school students, is cleaning up its act. The search engine has had the ability to form a love/hate relationship with its audience, resulting in some raving about its beneficial information and in others disapproving of its occasional faux material. In order to concur with thumbs up all around, the website has decided to add more structure to the process of publically omitting ones data. In the past, it was categorized as more of a free for all, allowing information to be posted without much supervision or guaranteed of legitimacy. However they are in the midst of making extreme progress, and as John Abell, New York bureau chief for Wired.com stated, "They've made a leap here; I think it's a good leap, a necessary leap, a righteous leap. In the history of Wikipedia, this will probably be seen as a pivotal adjustment."
The author portrayed the subject of the article, while including the controversy it caused as well. While presenting the issue arisen from the start, the article immediately escalated into the arguments being throw left and right. Yes, "the popular encyclopedia has drawn criticism for inaccuracies," however the openness and almost rule-free website has been rolling independently since creation. The assigned editors of various entries will indeed guarantee more validity, while at the same time shifting gears completely. Personally, I feel as though it would be beneficial to me along with multiple others for Wikipedia to be a trustworthy resource during research etc., and am hopeful that this change will improve the outlook for the site.
Further investigation questions:
1) When will this system take action?
2) Will the user ratings of Wiki improve or decline when the restrictions are activated?
3) Will the rules being placed on the site cause Menlo to allow it to become usable during research projects?
No comments:
Post a Comment