WIKIPEDIA – WITH LESS EMPHASIS ON (ENCYCLO)PEDIA
As the Social Media Bible states:
“Wikis… truly represent the social media foundation of user-generated content and the wisdom of the crowds.”
Maybe more like the ridiculousness of the crowds…
Teachers tell you not to cite Wikipedia for a reason. Its clever name plays on “encyclopaedia”, implying an unimpeachable and unbiased compilation of information, but really- Wikipedia vandals have ruined the wiki for other readers to the point where no credibility for the website remains. It can’t be trusted. What’s the point of having a website with information gathered from the public when the information is incorrect or is being misused? Wikipedia definitely needs more preventive anti-vandalism restrictions in place in order for it to gain better reputation, and frankly, to start being a useful wiki. In the meantime, I’ll continue to see Wikipedia as a wiki lacking validity as a legitimate source of information.
What’s your opinion- Wikipedia: yay or nay?
McGlynn, K. (2011). Huffingtonpost.com. Wikipedia’s10 Year Anniversary: The Funniest Entries Gone Wrong (PICTURES). Retrieved from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/16/wikipedia-10-year-anniver_n_809647.html
Safko, L. (2012). The Wisdom of the Wiki. Social Media Bible : Tactics, Tools, and Strategies for Business Success, 3rd Ed. (pp. 167-186). Retrieved from: http://zl9eq5lq7v.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=book&rft.title=The+Social+Media+Bible&rft.au=Lon+Safko&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.pub=John+Wiley+%26+Sons+Inc&rft.isbn=9781118269749&rft.externalDocID=9781118287231¶mdict=en-US