The Wikipedia Dilemma – Part 1

Debbie

Well, Hayward is an idiot who publishes false research.

Cassidy

Damn you Hayward. I believed in you!

Debbie

And then he goes on Wikipedia and edits it to say what he thinks.

Cassidy

Don’t worry. The admins will get rid of his vandalism!

😞

Debbie

Oh the trust you put in those admins!

Cassidy

Take a look at the discussions on Wikipedia. They (along with other contributors) are super on it. They even update it in real time with new info (Like with Notre Dame’s fire).

Debbie

I’ve always felt so confused about the average teacher’s opinion of Wikipedia.

It would make for a great article to write–write what you know about it and then go around and do a poll of what teachers know about it and see if they are wrong about a lot or just behind the times, or totally right on!.

Cassidy

It runs a lot smoother than most people realize, I think.

Just because it’s crowd sourced, doesn’t mean anybody can just waltz up and deface it without anything happening. You can anonymously edit it, but if you deface it, you’ll probably get IP banned (which means you can’t edit from that computer anymore), and also they clean it up right after. So there’s not much misinformation there.

Debbie

Copy and paste what we’ve discussed so far.

Cassidy

K

“Outroduction”

You’re probably wondering what you just read. That was the conversation between me and Debbie, that lead me to write this article about Wikipedia. I’m going to go in-depth about the different opinions that many different people have about Wikipedia. Stay tuned for the next article, where I show you some of the research I did. Should be interesting.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *