Jimmy Wales And Larry Sanger: Database Analysis

Wikipedia is a collaborative resource, which aims to be a compendium of all human knowledge. In a serious examination of Wikipedia as a credible and valid source of information we need to place our argument within a definable framework. As I will show information has many uses, for the purposes of this paper I will examine the use of Wikipedia for scholarly research, the kind, which I will be utilizing throughout the rest of my MBA program. I will be evaluating Wikipedia based on the parameters set forth by Brenda Spatt. The credentials, Impartiality, style/tone, and currency of Wikipedia will all be examined in this paper (Spatt 2011).

Launched on 15 January 2001, Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia that uses the web platform for online users to access. Boasting with over 26 million pieces of writing in 285 languages, Wikipedia has transformed to be a giant in the field of search engines optimization technology. The open source concept that it rides have made it cheap to access and a better choice for many online users. This is especially among the users who find it cumbersome to follow prolonged registration processes to access information on the internet. Any search term queried on the Google™ home page search engine will definitely give a hit from the Wikipedia site, and if not present, a prompt will request the user to create a page for such a term. In this way,

According to the article, “Top Ten Reasons Students Cannot Cite or Rely on Wikipedia” written by Mark E. Moran, an Irish student by the name of Shane Fitzgerald posted a fake quotation on a Wikipedia article about a deceased French composer named Maurice Jarre. Later, Fitzgerald was startled to learn that several major newspapers picked up the quote and published it in obituaries, confirming his suspicions of the questionable ways in which journalists use websites, and Wikipedia, as a reliable source. This proves that, while the person behind the screen publishing this article may know it is false, it can appear just as trustworthy as any other fact in the article. It also says in the article “Warming Up to the Culture of Wikipedia” by Noam Cohen, “...many curators are suspicious of a site where anyone can create and edit an article, and where the assertions of expertise are greeted with skepticism or, at best, a shrug.” This shows that it is not only some schools that may fear inaccurate evidence, but that museums are also skeptical of websites like

“Questioning Wikipedia” is an excellent series of articles written by author Nick Carr. Carr parses through some of the critical issues facing the website today. The most interesting subject Carr delves into is the debate between “inclusionists” and “deletionists” currently taking place among users of the site. Those who are “inclusionist” believe Wikipedia should publish a wide variety of articles, from pieces on Ernest Hemingway to pieces on cartoon characters from the 1950s. These users do not believe some knowledge is more important than other knowledge. To some individuals, cartoons from past generations are more important than famous American authors. To other people, famous American authors are more important. The value of the content

When students are doing research on the internet, Wikipedia is usually one of the first site to appear. For students, the site is usually tempting to click, but they are quickly reminded by their teachers that Wikipedia should not be used as a site of knowledge. They label the site as inaccurate, unreliable, and uncreditable. In Boyd’s article she writes that teachers consistently tell students to stay clear of Wikipedia at all cost. Students should not have to see the site as tempting. They should be allowed to use it and embrace the site. Wikipedia has so much educational potential and should not be ignored by teachers. Boyd also writes that some analyses have shown that Wikipedia’s content is just as creditable as, if not more reliable than, more traditional resources.

Eventhough, the internet can be helpful with education, it can also be unreliable. However, “The Hive” by Marchall Poe, was the openness of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that anyone can use it. This might work for some people specially that ones who attend school or college. This is very helpful for them because in Wikipedia you can search or find anything you would like. Since anyone can write, or delete or use information off of Wikipedia, it makes it less controversial because anyone can put their input into the website. If don’t agree with something, that’s alright because you can add your own opinion. Poe describes how authors of certain wiki pages write with a bias to support their facts. Facts become opinions when feelings and emotions of bias get involved. “Instead of relying on experts to

Wikipedia has millions of articles online based on a broad range of topics, including termite extermination. Commonly, this web source ranks first in the search engines, but the credibility and reliability fall short in terms of termite extermination. What are some of the ways that Wikipedia does not stand up to the test?

Stuart Geiger, Jonathan Morgan, and John Riedl, the authors’ language use and their connectivity to the audience felt more natural and appropriate. Halfacker, Geiger, Morgan, and Riedl’s article was similar to a written research paper and research papers are papers written to get a message across to the public. They had headings that of a research paper such as the introduction, the hypothesis, methods used, discussion, results, and conclusion. Not only that, they used complex professional language which indicated that they knew what they were talking about and that they know the worth of the paper they are writing. “Wikipedia has changed from “the encyclopedia that anyone can edit” to “the encyclopedia that anyone who understands the norms, socializes him or herself, dodges the impersonal wall of semi-automated rejection and still wants to voluntarily contribute his or her time and energy can edit” (Halfacker, para. 91).

By August 8, 2001, Wikipedia had over 8,000 articles. On September 25, 2001, Wikipedia had over 13,000 articles. And by the end of 2001 it had grown to approximately 20,000 articles and 18 language editions. It had reached 26 language editions by late 2002, 46 by the end of 2003, and 161 by the final days of 2004. Nupedia and Wikipedia coexisted until the former's servers were taken down permanently in 2003, and its text was incorporated into Wikipedia. English Wikipedia passed the mark of two million articles on September 9, 2007, making it the largest encyclopedia ever assembled, surpassing even the 1408 Yongle Encyclopedia, which had held the record for almost 600 years. These moves encouraged Wales to announce that Wikipedia would not display advertisements, and to change Wikipedia's domain from wikipedia.com to wikipedia.org. Around 1,800 articles were added daily to the encyclopedia in 2006; by 2013 that average was roughly 800. A team at the Palo Alto Research Center attributed this slowing of growth to the project's increasing exclusivity and resistance to change.Hidden whilst in discussion on the talk page: New or occasional editors have significantly higher rates of their edits reverted than an elite group of regular editors, colloquially known as "the cabal". This could make it more difficult for the project to recruit and retain new contributors over the long

For Wikipedia to become what it is today, along with other websites that freely share information such as social media, is in its origins by the founders of the web and in sites such as The Well,

Wikipedia has existed since January 2001 by Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia written and edited by volunteers. Murley states that as of March 2008, Wikipedia contained more than nine million articles, of which two million were in English. More than 75,000 contributors write in more than 250 languages. (2010, p. 594) However, any one can edit an existing article by clicking on the edit tab found at the top of an article. Only anonymous registered users add new articles. These articles must meet Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines. All references must be verifiable and the tone must be neutral. If the article does not meet all of the criteria, Wikipedia’s

Wikipedia (i/ˌwɪkᵻˈpiːdiə/ or i/ˌwɪkiˈpiːdiə/ WIK-i-PEE-dee-ə) is a free online encyclopedia that, by default, allows its users to edit any article.[4] Wikipedia is the largest and most popular general reference work on the Internet[5][6][7] and is ranked among the ten most popular websites.[2] Wikipedia is owned by the nonprofit Wikimedia Foundation.[8][9][10]

Despite the popular belief, writing an article on Wikipedia is subject to several rules. For example, before creating a page for a new article and a new topic, you have to make sure that the subject you tackled is either popular enough or old enough to be published. Yet there are some exceptions to this rule. It is the case for sudden events such as November 2015 Paris attacks that took place few days ago but already have a Wikipedia page.i Notability is not the only criterion to take into account before knowing if your article can be published or not. You also have to follow some basic rules such as avoiding plagiarism or always cite your sources at the end of the article. Moreover as an author you have to remain as neutral as possible. One of Wikipedia 's goal is to provide information without any biased point of view or personal statement. Maybe the two most important and famous pillars of Wikipedia are the fact that it is free to use and licence free. Anyone can publish, edit or use a Wikipedia article as long as one follows the rules mentioned earlier.ii

Wikipedia counts 75,000 editors who check the articles and their content to make sure that the information is valid and reliable. According to Schaffer (2009), the journal Nature conducted a study in 2005 and proved that Wikipedia is just as valid as any other encyclopedia, including Britannica, keeping in mind that errors and vandalism can occur to any of them (para. 2).

simple using the menus or the create command. It has field types that are still