Wikipedia: an online, free encyclopedia which
allows anyone to contribute their knowledge on a specific topic. This open concept of anyone being able to edit information online, is exemplified though my exploration of editing Wikipedia stubs. In examining this concept, I
chose to edit a Wikipedia stub on a topic relating to my studies. Being a family ecology student, I chose to edit a Wikipedia stub which focuses on existing interactions and the relationships. Thus, I chose to edit a stub on female bonding.
The concept of female bonding is interpreted in various ways as it is defined dependently on which the context it is used. Due to this broad range of possible definitions, as well as to my lack of knowledge in the topic, I decided to extend the stub by exemplifying female bonding rather than trying to define it. Though female bonding is evident in animals, I chose to focus the majority of my contributed examples on research based on female bonding evidence within human relationships. The decision to do so was solely based on my interest in human interaction. In addition, being a female, I was able to relate to the research I was bringing forward. This brought more interest in the topic chosen. The inclusion of female bonding between dolphins is included to support the fact that female bonding is evident in more than just the human species. I was required to do more in depth research on this topic, as I lack much knowledge in animal studies. However, I felt the inclusion of such study would strengthen the existing argument of female bonding being present across all species.
Screen capture of my Wikipedia entry about Female Bonding. Screen capture from:
Loana Valdez, personal collection. Original article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_bonding, Accessed Mar. 23 2012.
In the process of producing the edited stub, it dawned on me that the reliability of Wikipedia is somewhat questionable. If anyone is able to create an account and edit anything they please, then how can we be certain that the information presented to us is correct? In addition to this, how can we be certain that what we publish is not being "stolen" to be put on Wikipedia by someone else? It is evident that there are ethical issues present and come hand in hand with Wikipedia. To help dampen the effects of this, it is known that there is a "Wikipedia police" which monitors what is being posted. Though this can be reassuring at first, can we really be certain that the "Wiki police" is checking every single Wikipedia entry at all times? How reliable are the police online anyway? There are thousands of edits happening and over 50 000 visitors to the website itself. A fellow student of mine edited a stub on cyberphobia, even though she is a nutrition major. This Exemplifying how easy it is for literally anyone to contribute and have it published and available to the public. Even if the police are aware of the constant changes, there must be lag time from the moment someone makes a false edit, to when the "Wiki police" catch the perpetrator and correct the wrongful act.
Though there is doubt in Wikipedia, it is evident that there what it is producing is working. There are many more sites that follow the Wikipedia open concept; A Million penguins, Catawiki, TerWiki and Travellerspoint are just a few examples from the hundreds of others that exist.
Though there is doubt in Wikipedia, it is evident that there what it is producing is working. There are many more sites that follow the Wikipedia open concept; A Million penguins, Catawiki, TerWiki and Travellerspoint are just a few examples from the hundreds of others that exist.
I personally agree with your claim about the editings happening on Wikipedia.Many people with no knowledge on a topic,yet beleive their opinion on it is correct may edit the article and demostrate their thoughts.
ReplyDeleteYou definitely do need to be careful when using Wikipedia, in terms of the reliability of the information. However, when I was doing my Wiki Stub, on dourine in horses, I did all my work and posted it in the late evening, and by the time I had logged back on early the next afternoon someone had already made some adjustments to my formatting and sentence structure! Although they didn't alter the information I had put in, I have confidence that peer-editing within the WIkipedia world is done frequently. And since we rely on peer-editing for scholarly papers, I feel very confident in the Wikipedia community monitoring the information and checking it's validity. It's always a good idea to source where they got their information from (I like to track their references), but I think that Wikipedia is more reliable than it gets credit for! It really utilizes the cyber community in the best way possible! I personally thoroughly enjoyed making my contribution to the Wiki World!
ReplyDeleteThanks for the post!