There is a love/hate relationship with Wikipedia. I think its the queen of the internet (google's king), and I count on it for almost everything. The only time it ever lied to me was when it told me that George W. Bush was born in June and therefore was a Gemini. And me, being a cusp of Gemini with like 4 other planets and my rising sign in Gemini, was offended. How can an idiot like that be a godamned Gemini?!?!
But that's beside the point. A lot of teachers hate Wikipedia because it's "unreliable." But there are dozens of other websites that include unreliable information as well-even biased 411. Then there's the people like me who love it. I love it because it gives me people's birthdays, from which I can determine their horoscope sign. I love it because I can look up almost and I know I'll find it in Wiki. I love it because anyone can write an article, but there's people standing by to double and triple check the accuracy of that article. But I especially love it because it refuses to sell advertisement spots.
In a recent article by the LA Times, despite Wikipedia's low funds, "with about 300 million page views a day, the site by some estimates could be worth many hundreds of millions of dollars if it sold advertising space. It doesn't. Wikipedia's business plan is, basically, to hold out a tin cup whenever it runs low on funds, which is very often."
I'm still skeptical about whether or not Wikipedia will eventually fold and be like other annoying sites (**coughmyspacecoughmostofthewebcoughcough**). As I said in my previous entry, I firmly believe that advertisemnt is pollution. So, to hear that a site like Wikipedia-a site that could be worth such a huge amount of money-refuses to advertise is schockingly refreshing. I love you Wikipedia. Kudos goes to you, the donations and the volunteers that keep the queen of the net helping dozens of students with their reasearch. (And yes, I'm talking to YOU)!. ;)
This is an interesting take on Wikipedia. It never even occured to me that there were no ads. Imagine that, a huge site sticking up for integrity! Now I love it still more.
Thank you for this.
T.k.
it was my pleasure! lol. fight the system!!
I know most teachers seem to not like Wikipedia only because anybody can post anything on it. But then again, it seems that just about anybody can have their own webpage these days and who knows how accurate the information they post could be. You should always have more than one source to make up for that fact.
like you never know if im telling you lies....this might be a lie!! except it was in the la times, so you know its not! lol. anyway, thanks for the comment
I love wikipedia because it is such a vast amount of readily available information on anything. However, I don't have enough faith in it to, say, use it as a reference. It's not a completely valid source of information, and I believe that's why teachers don't like students using it in their research. Anyone can change anything on it. It's monitored, but there's just too much on there to monitor everything, all the time.
For valid references, I'll look at an article from a peer-reviewed journal over wikipedia anytime.
Aside from that, I'm also glad wikipedia doesn't sell ad space.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/sawaboof
"...There is a crushing guilt that comes with being a Catholic. Whether things are good or bad or you're simply... eating tacos in the park, there is always the crushing guilt."
-30 Rock-
this article brings some light on the problem. if more people hear about it, they're more likely to do something about it. maybe then more people will donate and even volunteer so the workload won't be so stressful and more thorough
Yeah, when I was doing my Holocaust paper, I googled something I found quoted on Wikipedia. After several pages, nothing scholarly popped up. After that, I stopped using it as a reference.
Interesting take on it, though.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!