Author |
|
John OConnor Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 01 August 2004 Location: United States Posts: 1109
|
Posted: 09 March 2007 at 4:08pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
more on Wiki.....
By Rob Mackey
Trust me, I’m an expert.
In an interview with Reuters TV in Tokyo, Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, the user-edited online encyclopedia, said last night that contributors who identify themselves as experts will be asked to furnish some proof of their qualifications.
“It isn’t that hard to verify that someone is a professor. … I mean, we don’t need to run an F.B.I. background check on everyone — we just want to make sure that if someone’s putting forth credentials, that we look into it a little bit and make sure.”
The Associated Press reports that Mr. Wales “said in interviews by phone and instant message yesterday from Japan that contributors still would be able to remain anonymous.”
The move comes in response to what Wikipedia itself calls “the Essjay controversy.” As Noam Cohen explained in The New York Times earlier this week, Essjay was a prominent contributor to Wikipedia whose lies about his credentials were exposed after they were repeated in an article in The New Yorker.
To the Wikipedia world, Essjay was a tenured professor of religion at a private university with expertise in canon law, according to his user profile. But in fact, Essjay is a 24-year-old named Ryan Jordan, who attended a number of colleges in Kentucky and lives outside Louisville. …
The Essjay episode underlines some of the perils of collaborative efforts like Wikipedia that rely on many contributors acting in good faith, often anonymously and through self-designated user names. But it also shows how the transparency of the Wikipedia process — all editing of entries is marked and saved — allows readers to react to suspected fraud.
Mr. Jordan’s deception came to public attention last Monday when The New Yorker published a rare editors’ note saying that when it wrote about Essjay as part of a lengthy profile of Wikipedia, “neither we nor Wikipedia knew Essjay’s real name,” and that it took Essjay’s credentials and life experience at face value.
Interestingly, The A.P. also reports that Mr. Jordan himself blames The New Yorker’s fact-checking department for not catching him sooner.
Jordan did not return an e-mail seeking comment. But in a note on his Wikipedia “user page” before it was “retired,” he apologized for any harm he caused Wikipedia.
“It was, quite honestly, my impression that it was well known that I was not who I claimed to be, and that in the absence of any confirmation, no respectible [sic] publication would print it,” he wrote.
By allowing expert contributors to remain anonymous, Wikipedia’s plan does seem to raise a question: might it be a good idea simply to abandon the tradition of “screen names” that has grown up with the Web, and start encouraging people to use their real names when they contribute to discussion or debate online?
Polly Toynbee, a columnist for The Guardian, recently spoke about the corrosive effects of anonymity on the Web:
Toynbee, who has written about the abuse she has received from bloggers, said one byproduct of the Internet age has been that when her columns are posted on Guardian Unlimited, the abuse pours in almost immediately: “I have around 50 arch-enemies who seem to get up at about five in the morning — they have obviously never bought The Guardian, they wouldn’t contaminate their fingers with it, and they are right-wingers who hate The Guardian and everything it stands for.
“Letters used to be quite polite, e-mails were a bit ruder. But this is of another dimension, because you can’t answer back unless in public, because they’re anonymous. I think that’s wrong — they should have to put their own names up there. It would make them stop and think twice if they thought their colleagues and families would see what they wrote. Anonymity brings out real mischief in us. It is a debased discourse.”
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Zaki Hasan Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 8105
|
Posted: 10 March 2007 at 1:04am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
As I always tell my students, Wikipedia is a tremendous resource. Tremendous. It's a gateway to reams and reams of useful information. However, follow their links. Any good Wikipedia article will have citations up the yin-yang, which you can follow for yourself and judge their credibility. Use Wikipedia to point you towards information, but don't cite it, cite the cites.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
|
Zaki Hasan Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 8105
|
Posted: 10 March 2007 at 12:31pm | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Interesting article that echoes my last post.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
|
Brian O'Neill Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 05 May 2004 Posts: 741
|
Posted: 16 March 2007 at 9:08am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
If wikipedia lies about celebrities nobody cares about, will a tree still fall in the woods?:
http://www.physorg.com/news93244796.html
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Trevor Krysak Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 4163
|
Posted: 16 March 2007 at 9:46am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
Oops.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Paulo Pereira Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 24 April 2006 Posts: 15539
|
Posted: 18 March 2007 at 8:53am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
QUOTE:
As I always tell my students, Wikipedia is a tremendous resource. Tremendous. It's a gateway to reams and reams of useful information. However, follow their links. Any good Wikipedia article will have citations up the yin-yang, which you can follow for yourself and judge their credibility. Use Wikipedia to point you towards information, but don't cite it, cite the cites. |
|
|
Well said.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Stephen Robinson Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 5835
|
Posted: 19 March 2007 at 11:38am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
Quote:
As I always tell my students, Wikipedia is a tremendous resource. Tremendous. It's a gateway to reams and reams of useful information. However, follow their links. Any good Wikipedia article will have citations up the yin-yang, which you can follow for yourself and judge their credibility. Use Wikipedia to point you towards information, but don't cite it, cite the cites. | | |
Well said.
SER: Sorry, but Wikipedia is garbage. Recent case in point:
Sinbad Dismisses Death Reports
American comedian Sinbad has laughed off reports he died of a heart attack last Saturday, after website Wikipedia.org stated he had passed away. Wikipedia describes itself as 'the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit', and is used by internet surfers across the world. The entry for funnyman Sinbad was incorrectly edited last weekend by an unknown user. The Jingle All The Way actor - born David Adkins - realized something was wrong when he started getting hundreds of phone calls, emails and text messages from people concerned about the star. And despite the mix-up, the 50-year-old actor accepts the mistake could easily be made in the future. He says, "(On) Saturday I rose from the dead and then died again. It's gonna be more commonplace as the internet opens up more and more. It's not that strange."
SER: I've always seen "articles" that referred to an actor as gay (he isn't and if he is, then he's not out publically) and an actress as having gotten a role via the casting couch. The site lacks any journalistic integrity. If it wants to allow people to "edit" content freely, then at least have a moderator who reviews changes before they are "live." Is it really that difficult?
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
|
Paulo Pereira Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 24 April 2006 Posts: 15539
|
Posted: 19 March 2007 at 6:06pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
Well, again, you have to make sure the article cites its sources, then look at those sources.
On another note, Sinbad is 50?
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Zaki Hasan Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 8105
|
Posted: 19 March 2007 at 8:33pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
Sorry, but Wikipedia is garbage. Recent case in point:
******
Hey, funny how that article in no way whatsoever invalidates the point I was making.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
|
Kurt Anderson Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 18 November 2005 Location: United States Posts: 2035
|
Posted: 19 March 2007 at 10:02pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
So much for my term paper on deceased comedic giants from Star Search.
How's Brad Garrett's health?
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Thomas Moudry Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 5060
|
Posted: 23 March 2007 at 10:32pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
I've banned Wikipedia from my classroom for formal papers. The kids were
miffed at first, but in the end, it's made them better researchers.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Paulo Pereira Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 24 April 2006 Posts: 15539
|
Posted: 24 March 2007 at 1:54pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
I'm not as anti-Wikipedia as some others (as has been mentioned, it can be a good place from which to find other sources) but there are definitely irritating aspects about Wikipedia. Saw this curious statement on the Rubin Carter entry:
"The question of Carter’s actual guilt or innocence remains a strongly polarizing one. However this much is certain: either the criminal justice system released a triple murderer from the punishment that two separate juries had recommended, or it imprisoned an innocent man for almost 20 years."
That's basically like saying "it's certain Rubin Carter is either guilty or innocent."
Edited by Paulo Pereira on 24 March 2007 at 2:09pm
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|