The Problem with Wikipedia Today
For many Wikipedia is a great resource for free in-depth information on a wide range of topics. What many don’t know is that Wikipedia also has a darker side that is not well known to the average user.
This darker side of Wikipedia stems from the fact that the information provided comes from an open group of contributors, resulting in unreliable data lacking proper sources.
Many teachers today prohibit students from using Wikipedia as a source in reports and research due to the anonymity and possibility for unconfirmed (or even falsified) information.
Wikipedia has also been a target for vandalism by unscrupulous individuals and advertisers as a way to gain traffic and increased exposure, or even to discredit and defame competitors.
The other major problem is brought on by the fact that anyone can become an editor, and by contributing to the site even gain administrator status (granting the power to block and ban users as well as lock and remove pages).
Examples:
One such example is that of the Wikipedia bio of John Seigenthaler, Sr. (editor in chief of USA Today), in which falsified information was introduced and left unchanged for 4 months!
Another great example is that of the so called Wikipedia War on Gaming, in which articles involving traditional (and historical) gaming references and even classical games were defaced, locked, and even deleted in some cases.
Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia has even had problems in the past, including a short entry he created about a restaurant in South Africa that was put up for deletion because the restaurant wasn’t “notable” enough.
So the next time you find yourself on Wikipedia, remember that it can be a great resource of information, as long as you keep in mind that these are real human beings writing (and editing!) these articles (the elitist, arrogant, jealous, and spiteful creatures we are).
Related posts
- Spread the Love:
About Author
Sean February 26th
Wikipedia is a great resource, I don't even know how many times it's popped up first in the SERP to answer whatever question I had. If you need to be sure, however, I suppose it pays to have access to a real encyclopedia. Anyone remember Encarta? I didn't think so. (hah)
mauris March 3rd
the problem is the students from today doesnt use the lexikon, they only use digital media to get informations
bibor March 13th
wikipedia almost know everything , so its a nice source when u need to know something fast.
Randy April 16th
i love wikipedia. ^^
Jim December 16th
I really do not like it because it is not authority. Uneducated, dumb and wanna be smart ass people are the ones who are giving their opinions only. I think that it is fine if you are AWARE that a lot of what you might be reading might not be true then, go ahead and read it. BUT if you are not aware of this you will be pulling in a bunch of false data. This is NOT good.
Jeff December 22nd
Interesting observation, I do use Wikipedia as reference but I can see your point. The same can be said of any website and its content though.
vargas January 23rd
yeah, but not just any website is set up to be an informational reference point. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Therefore there is an obligation to be dispassionate and accurate with the information it provides.
nosson March 5th
Why is the discussion page on Wikipedia a wiki. Shouldn’t it be like a regular discussion page where it cant be deleted by anyone who wants?
Eric P May 23rd
One problem with wikipedia is that the power of it’s content is with a few persons. Anyone can contribute but if there are different opinions then there is no good way to resolve whose opinion will be stated in wikipedia. The way it is now it’s not the educated opinion, it’s the popular opinion. Or rather, it’s the opinion of the loud few who wants to spread their word.
Add Yours
YOU