So when I was initially asked to edit
Wikipedia, my initial thoughts were: Yes! I thought it would be cool to edit this information database to see how fast the wiki editors would respond. I have heard stories about their fast response and wanted to test it out myself. It is a testament to
Wikipedia's users how quickly they respond, although not necessarily to the accuracy of the information itself. Personally, I think that
Wikipedia is a great resource to get a firm idea of most any subject. Naturally, the user should do more research and look into other avenues for further information.
If I had to edit any one thing on Wikipedia, it would probably be the Non-denominational Christianity page. I do not disagree with any of the information but rather would add more information to the wiki. I think this type of Christianity is fast growing and deserves to have a more detailed and descriptive wiki. I was surprised to the see that the "history" tab did not reveal quite as many edits as I had expected. It seems the original author did a fair job of representing this religious (non) denomination.
I too think it would be interesting to see how well the people behind the website monitor the content that gets added. Once, I jokingly added my name to my high schools "alumni section" along with some false personal accomplishments. Wikipedia caught it right away and it was removed within a day. This is incredible considering how many edits are done daily. It is hard to imagine how they could catch and test small little details such as this.
ReplyDeleteI think that's an interesting approach to editing wikipedia. Not so much for the content purposes but to see how fast someone comes a long and edits what you wrote, assuming it was wrong. It's almost amazing how fast people will jump on and re-edit things.
ReplyDeleteI shared a similar view in my post. I was also interested to see how long it would take for Wikipedia to respond to any edits I might make to the website. I find the changes that Wikipedia makes in an attempt to keep the website content "accurate" and "unbiased" necessary despite the fact that they limit users from adding opinions to the content.
ReplyDelete