Comments on: Wikipedia, academia and Seigenthaler

By: Yggdrasil

Yggdrasil — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 16:21:40 +0000

Winamp 5.12 F… Reader of audio and video. Very recommended.

By: Tony

Tony — Thu, 16 Feb 2006 18:41:29 +0000

Hi,

I work for academia and I don’t think Wikipedia is that bad… But I don’t think it’s that good either. I posted a comments about what, in my humble opinion could be done.

I’m new to the blogging community by the way.
Tony

By: if:book

if:book — Tue, 03 Jan 2006 22:59:50 +0000

wikipedia, lifelines, and the packaging of authority

In a nice comment in yesterday’s Times, “The Nitpicking of the Masses vs. the Authority of the Experts,” George Johnson revisits last month’s Seigenthaler smear episode and Nature magazine Wikipedia-Britannica comparison, and decides to place his long…

By: Mark

Mark — Sun, 01 Jan 2006 00:43:18 +0000

Excellent post! I would like to invite you to RecentChangesCamp in Portland, early Feb.

check it out: http://recentchanges.info/?p=51

Best, Mark

By: The Croton

The Croton — Tue, 27 Dec 2005 22:42:05 +0000

然的（確率的）時代

Unofficial Japanese translation of “The Probabilistic Age” by Chris Anderson.

By: Herge

Herge — Mon, 26 Dec 2005 15:46:15 +0000

Very interesting thoughts. But I encountered another error in Wikipedia and I posted about it http://spook.squarespace.com/weblog/how-much-do-you-trust-wikipedia.html. In fact, I think a good research topic would be
“How many mistakes can you spot and rectify on Wikipedia for every correct entry that is present?” The answer would be mind boggling but it would also highlight the human fallacies that you mentioned above.

By: lindsey

lindsey — Fri, 23 Dec 2005 09:30:43 +0000

Oh wow, the anti-wikipedia stance has been pretty ridiculous. I happen to be a student. At a college. While I know because it is edited and contributed to by random people, I know that sometimes I may run across biased or false info on Wikipedia, but I’d rather have it there than not. Many times after a lecture if I don’t understand something at all, or find interest in something that wasn’t discussed in length, lately Wikipedia has been the first place I go. I remember having to read a certain section of Nietzsche’s writings for philosophy, and started wondering about Nietzsche himself but during the semester I simply did not have enough time to go hunting for a huge essay or book on him. So I went to Wikipedia. The stuff there was enough to strike my interests to go find more information. I’ve also used it to help with understanding evolutionary periods of time, the Constitution, various court cases…and also noticed Wikipedia has some fun things you’d never find in a paper encyclopedia, like information on rock bands, or ‘internet phenomena’.

I don’t know why there is a huge lack of trust of users of the internet to know that anything they find on the web may not be entirely true, a lack of trust of internet users who need more info to go find paper versions of encyclopedias, books, magazines, etc etc. I know I’m not the only one who goes to these other sources for info just by seeing who is hanging around my college’s library and to see what sources they are using.

I agree that academia should be jumping on this thing rather than being info elitists, and teaching how properly to use web materials. I personally had a philosophy professor that tried to teach my class how to properly use web materials, and to cite them, and to realize if you cannot cite something online to take it with a large grain of salt and move on to a more reliable source.

All I know is that Wikipedia is not 100% bad, and if it were to ever disappear I think a severely valuable source of information would be gone.

By: John Johansen

John Johansen — Thu, 22 Dec 2005 07:09:37 +0000

Until the academic communinity can get a handle on the sources they do consider valid, they shouldn’t be so critical of Wikipedia.

Was listening to this
NPR Story last week:

By: Aaron Barnhart

Aaron Barnhart — Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:26:35 +0000

I just had a conversation with Andrew Postman, son of the late Neil Postman. He just wrote a new intro to the 20th anniversary edition of his dad’s book Amusing Ourselves to Death. I’ll post the audio later this week at my site (if you care), but the relevant part to this discussion is that Neil could not foresee in 1985, when he wrote his book, that the explosion of channels, both on TV and online, would create a universe of commentary and reaction and re-reaction ad almost infinitum, that one simply could not have anticipated in a time of ABC, NBC and CBS.

Now, as Andrew Postman points out, no sooner does someone say or post something outrageous than a bit-torrent of counterargument sweeps in from other corners to blunt its effect. “Out of control” is a great way to describe it, and I agree, it’s an outstanding feature of this new system, as the activists in Northeast Ohio are proving this week. It’s why you can’t take seriously the people who complain that “bloggers brought down Dan Rather” or “Wikipedia ruined my reputation.” No, bloggers fed a system that kept alive a story that wound up bringing down Dan Rather. And John Seigenthaler’s complaint brought about a whirlwind of indignation, followed by this current crosswind of perspective to which we are now contributing. And as a result, even he would have to admit that his reputation really wasn’t blemished at all by that Wikipedia slam (except that several thousand bloggers now consider him a complete cyber-doofus).

By: MArty

MArty — Tue, 20 Dec 2005 11:43:05 +0000

Is it really like the knifes in the restaurant?

Wikipedia design seems more like letting folks in the kitchen. Many more people come to the “restaurant” just looking for a meal (readers vs. posters). You are really suggesting we design a restaurant where people can come in an order anything on the menu but not expect the food to have the right ingredients or be fully cooked. However, I often go to social settings that I don’t know the cooks. They may even be volunteers. The events are not regulated (community pot lucks, festivals, firemen pancake breakfasts etc.)

I love wikipedia but it is a social trust and expectation that matters.

Who assumes your getting fancy french food when you show up at a county fair? Only an ass orders the baked salmon from a hot dog stand.