Slashdot Mirror
Happy 18th Birthday, Wikipedia (washingtonpost.com)
This week, Wikipedia celebrates its 18th birthday. If the massive crowdsourced encyclopedia project were human, then in most countries, it would just now be considered a legal adult. But in truth, the free online encyclopedia has long played the role of the Internet's good grown-up.
From a story: Wikipedia has grown enormously since its inception: It now boasts 5.7 million articles in English and pulled in 92 billion page views last year. The site has also undergone a major reputation change. If you ask Siri, Alexa or Google Home a general-knowledge question, it will likely pull the response from Wikipedia. The online encyclopedia has been cited in more than 400 judicial opinions, according to a 2010 paper in the Yale Journal of Law & Technology.
Many professors are ditching the traditional writing assignment and instead asking students to expand or create a Wikipedia article on the topic. And YouTube Chief Executive Susan Wojcicki announced a plan last March to pair misleading conspiracy videos with links to corresponding articles from Wikipedia. Facebook has also released a feature using Wikipedia's content to provide users more information about the publication source for articles in their feed.
Many professors are ditching the traditional writing assignment and instead asking students to expand or create a Wikipedia article on the topic. And YouTube Chief Executive Susan Wojcicki announced a plan last March to pair misleading conspiracy videos with links to corresponding articles from Wikipedia. Facebook has also released a feature using Wikipedia's content to provide users more information about the publication source for articles in their feed.
"The Internet doesn't need an encyclopaedia, it is an encyclopaedia. What it needs, is a decent index."
WP is a shit idea done shittily.
--
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
The Internet is nothing like an encyclopedia!
The Internet is indexed - that's the function that search engines provide. Personally, I'd say they're "decent" but not great. (I want searches with parentheses and more operators.)
Wikipedia is a great idea. With less than perfect implementation. A lot of people get a lot of value from it. If it were really that bad, we'd see stronger competitors.
There was a massive opportunity for Wikipedia to actually disrupt teaching and self-learning and they COMPLETELY squandered it.
An article could be written for the layman, with advanced details/explanations for the novice/expert, a tutorial, examples to make sure you understand the concepts, videos, audio pronunciation, tips from professionals, a forum, along with verification/authenticity from professors for accuracy.
Wikipedia COULD have been basically an interactive textbook, reference, dictionary, encyclopedia, forum, fan site, library, and StackOverflow all rolled in one.
INSTEAD we get some circle jerk admins whining about citations, revert wars, idiotic politics and policies such as no trivia sections, no original research, and pages deleted because they aren't "notable" enough (as if popularity was _ever_ a good way to decide that a 1 KB database entry was worth keeping LOL). Why the fuck do I have to go to Project Gutenberg to read a public domain book or YouTube to see a video about the topic? At least put a fucking link so I can see it on YouTube or a link to a store where I can buy the TV/movie/music asset, etc.
And then these smegheads have the gall to constantly beg for money??
Hey dumbass wikipedia admins: one man's trivia is another man's junk. Information is MULTI-Valued. Just because it has NO value to YOU, doesn't imply it has no value. You had ONE job: Categorize information. WE, the readers, determine what is USEFUL.
Wikipedia has been shit for years; a pale shadow of what could have been -- a bastion of all knowledge, a digital library.
So who is going to take up the mantle?