Know it All

What do you think are the author's main points in this article?

I think that the author's goal with this article was to illustrate the cultural phenomenon known as Wikipedia. Wikipedia has become our generations goto source for any and all information. If it wasn't expressly forbidden, it would be my sole citation for every research paper I've ever done. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia at it's core, but it is also so much more. It is a social experiment; the goal being to see what happens when people share information. And the experiment has been successful beyond anyones wildest dreams. The idea, as the article highlights, is crazy, and most "credible" sources say nothing on Wikipedia can be trusted. However, as a study has shown, the error rates between Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britannica are almost identical. I believe that in 20 years, Wikipedia will be considered the credible source of reference.

An important part of credible writing is selecting good supporting evidence. Select a passage from this article that illustrates the effective use of supporting detail. Explain why you think it is particularly effective.

Wikipedia remains a lumpy work in progress. The entries can read as though they had been written by a seventh grader: clarity and concision are lacking; the facts may be sturdy, but the connective tissue is either anemic or absent; and citation is hit or miss. Wattenberg and Viégas, of I.B.M., note that the vast majority of Wikipedia edits consist of deletions and additions rather than of attempts to reorder paragraphs or to shape an entry as a whole, and they believe that Wikipedia’s twenty-five-line editing window deserves some of the blame. It is difficult to craft an article in its entirety when reading it piecemeal, and, given Wikipedians’ obsession with racking up edits, simple fixes often take priority over more complex edits. Wattenberg and Viégas have also identified a “first-mover advantage”: the initial contributor to an article often sets the tone, and that person is rarely a Macaulay or a Johnson. The over-all effect is jittery, the textual equivalent of a film shot with a handheld camera.

I found this quote to contain good supporting evidence. A statement was made, and it was followed by several quotes and facts which reinforced the initial idea.

Throughout the article, the author compares Wikipedia to the Encyclopedia Britannica, but not specifically on design. How would you compare the two encyclopedias from a design perspective?

From a design perspective, the two are completely different. Wikipedia is designed with the idea that with more people and more ideas, the best information will come out. On the other hand, Encyclopedia Britannica approaches the problem of information with a research and careful thought approach. They both have their merits; the latter probably being more accurate, and the former having more topics and a broader perspective.