When I think of Wikipedia, I never think that somewhere along the line, it had a starting point. It's always been a vast pool of information, whether it be about it Damascus or the medicinal uses of papaya (these are both topics that I have come across on Wikipedia). Of course, I know that Wikipedia is never truly a reliable source, simply because of its main function: to be an easily accessible source of information based in truth. Fortunately, but unfortunately for Wikipedia, truth is relative; this leads to friction amongst editors and information that can be less than reliable.
I would never cite Wikipedia in any of my research for school, but I unashamedly use it as a jumping off point for almost everything that I am interested in. For instance, when doing our poetry-close reading papers, I needed to know what a paper nautilus was; now, thanks to Wikipedia, I know more about them than I ever needed to. I guess this is good information to have when I watch Jeopardy. Another topic that was interesting was the fact that non-professional editors had some hostility towards the professionals. I think that's a silly attitude to have, because at the end of the day, they're all there for the same thing: amassing information.
It was nice to read about Wikipedia's conception. I always wondered about it, but never took the time to look too deeply into the matter. Despite it's humble beginning as Nupedia, Wikipedia has grown into a something that Wales can, and does, take pride in.
I agree with your idea of Wikipedia as a vast pool of information. I too never thought to look into the creation of the site, or for what specific purposes for which it was created. The idea that professional and non-professional contributors to the site go to such lengths to foil each others attempts to publish information is outright stupid. You are correct, all users of Wikipedia are there for the same reason: to gather free, accessible information for the interested public.
ReplyDelete