User:Miskin: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
"<i>Touting itself as “the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit”, it’s no wonder that Wikipedia has garnered so much bad press lately. After all, it is hard to imagine that millions of anonymous users could accurately maintain a factual and unbiased living encyclopedia. Wikipedia is a non-profit site that is policed by hundreds of volunteers, yet very few of these volunteers have the experience and knowledge of a professional writer/editor. A cultural bias has seemed to have washed over many entries on the site, as general consensus replaces cold, hard facts. There is also a matter of vandalism, which the site is susceptible to. These problems, coupled with the almost obsessive behavior of many of the volunteers (try placing an external link on the site without having it removed), have led people to other sources for information.</i>" |
|||
"<i>Throughout recorded time, and probably since the end of the Neolithic Age, there have been three kinds of people in the world, the High, the Middle, and the Low. They have been subdivided in many ways, they have borne countless different names, and their relative numbers, as well as their attitude towards one another, have varied from age to age: but the essential structure of society has never altered.</i>" E.G. |
|||
Wikipedia is an extremely useful "user-generated reference service". It is not, however, an encyclopedia and by definition it will never become one. |
"<i>Wikipedia is an extremely useful "user-generated reference service". It is not, however, an encyclopedia and by definition it will never become one.</i> |
||
As it is obvious to the entire world, wikipedia is also now a begging service. You don't have a job or money? Join wikipedia staff to beg for it. |
|||
Latest revision as of 21:33, 11 November 2016
"Touting itself as “the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit”, it’s no wonder that Wikipedia has garnered so much bad press lately. After all, it is hard to imagine that millions of anonymous users could accurately maintain a factual and unbiased living encyclopedia. Wikipedia is a non-profit site that is policed by hundreds of volunteers, yet very few of these volunteers have the experience and knowledge of a professional writer/editor. A cultural bias has seemed to have washed over many entries on the site, as general consensus replaces cold, hard facts. There is also a matter of vandalism, which the site is susceptible to. These problems, coupled with the almost obsessive behavior of many of the volunteers (try placing an external link on the site without having it removed), have led people to other sources for information."
"Wikipedia is an extremely useful "user-generated reference service". It is not, however, an encyclopedia and by definition it will never become one.