I found this on Flickr. Note this is licensed under Creative Commons, which gives additional permissions beyond the fair use exception to US and international copyright law.
We're talking about Wikipedia, among other things, in INFS 1000 right now. So, to move beyond posting random funny stuff to finding the teachable moment, what about this image rings true? INFS 1000 folks, post comments in D2L; others can add your comments here.
Posts
I think there are a couple of things that "ring true" here - and they're kind of the flip side of each other. For one thing. this image (comic as it is) points to the perception that Wikipedia is essentially filled with useless information. I think it can also be said that, by extension, the message is that public moderated content is useless. I personally don't think that's the case.
ReplyDeleteHowever, there is a grain of truth here - a lot of the information on Wikipedia is, if not useless, perhaps questionable - in content, credibility, showing bias, etc. In addition, there is little in the way of proper citation, as noted.
But, having said that, I actually think Wikipedia can be a really valuable tool: it has some wonderful articles on literature that I have used. I think the key is that it is a "helper" tool - it should not be used for an original source (not yet anyway!) or be relied of for credibility (again, not YET).
But, for whatever reason, I am hopeful that user-generated content (and Wikipedia contributions in particular) will continue to grow in credibility and depth and will someday be excellent sources of information.
Thoughtful response, Roxanne! Indeed, Wikipedia is a valuable tool; I use it all the time. Sometimes, it is the best reference source for getting started with a particular topic.
ReplyDeleteIn INFS 1000, we've talked about the information cycle (http://www.libraries.psu.edu/instruction/infocycle/infocycle.html). How do you (anyone) see Wikipedia fitting into the information cycle?
I'm looking forward to reading what impressions others have.