After exploring Wikipedia's process of disseminated knowledge, I think I'm about as likely as before to rely on the website. I've realized that it is extremely reliable, as long as one makes sure the citations are legitimate (and there sure are a lot of citations... Wikipedia editors seem crazy about them, which is a good thing). Furthermore, there are many people editing Wikipedia pages with the goal of making the information more clear, easy to understand, and unbiased.
Unlike before, I now know of the treasure trove of information (and interesting debate) residing on the talk page, and I will definitely visit this page for articles I look at in the future, because it really illustrates how the article evolved and provides potentially useful information that may no longer be in the article itself. Reading the talk page also makes the material at hand far more interesting. Nevertheless, the page holds the danger of simply being a forum for people to express their opinions, which may or may not be accurate, and it can skew or bias the reader's view on the topic being studied.
Unfortunately, investigating Wikipedia's talk pages have somewhat turned me away from attempting to edit pages myself. Several of the current editors (especially those who have been editing for many years) seem arrogant and unwelcoming to new editors. This may be necessary to maintain Wikipedia's distinct style and presentation of information, but it discourages people like myself, who may have valuable insight to offer, from joining the conversation for fear of being shot down. If I do ever join the discussion, it will be regarding a topic I feel extremely knowledgable about and one which I can support with the masses of sources Wikipedia users so unwaveringly desire.
Unlike before, I now know of the treasure trove of information (and interesting debate) residing on the talk page, and I will definitely visit this page for articles I look at in the future, because it really illustrates how the article evolved and provides potentially useful information that may no longer be in the article itself. Reading the talk page also makes the material at hand far more interesting. Nevertheless, the page holds the danger of simply being a forum for people to express their opinions, which may or may not be accurate, and it can skew or bias the reader's view on the topic being studied.
Unfortunately, investigating Wikipedia's talk pages have somewhat turned me away from attempting to edit pages myself. Several of the current editors (especially those who have been editing for many years) seem arrogant and unwelcoming to new editors. This may be necessary to maintain Wikipedia's distinct style and presentation of information, but it discourages people like myself, who may have valuable insight to offer, from joining the conversation for fear of being shot down. If I do ever join the discussion, it will be regarding a topic I feel extremely knowledgable about and one which I can support with the masses of sources Wikipedia users so unwaveringly desire.
No comments:
Post a Comment