Judi McLeod
Judi McLeod, Editor






Features





Magazine





About CFP


Joshua Hill

Email Joshua

Joshua's Archive


print Print friendly

E-mail a friend

Contact Us

Open Source insanity

The Insanity of Wikipedia

By Joshua S. Hill

Wednesday, July 4, 2007

In the day to day process that begins my writing for various websites, I find myself sitting down, with a nice cup of tea between me and my keyboard, and a few hundred articles to sift through on my computer. It may sound tedious, but in reality, it is really fun. I get to keep up to date with all the news that interests me, and learn a few things along the way. Today provided me with one of the greatest articles I've ever come across -- or, more to the point, one of the greatest websites.

Wikipedia is possibly the world's most famous website. It will rank number one on a majority of searches and will pretty much always be in the top 5 results when you google any topic. It is the free encyclopedia for the world, and anyone can edit the information that is there; as long as they can cite where they got the information.

Of course, this 'open source' mentality has created some, let's call it 'interestingness'.

With the nature of information always in fluctuation, it can sometimes be hard to pin down just exactly what is the 'correct' information. In fact, I have recently found myself with the urge to update articles, simply because I am the first one to visit the page after a scientific discovery that discredits, surpasses or corrects any data for that particular entry.

The information is always changing, and it can lead to some discrepancies. This is one of the reasons why many educational institutions urge their students not to use Wikipedia as a citation for any of their papers. Where has the information come from, and is the citation still valid? Is the entry at the time of reading under attack by spammer's intent on making us believe that scientific evidence has now brought proof that cats are indeed alien overlords come to rule earth (trust me, it's not as unlikely as you may first think… just look at the way they watch you!).

Whereas in your trusty Encyclopedia Britannica set that was gifted to you on your 21st birthday, or on the latest edition of Encarta the information is not likely to change, Wikipedia has the potential to change now, now, and now! The benefit of course to Wikipedia is that same problem; the information can change according to the facts. It is these facts that tend to create issues among the more avid readers and authors at Wikipedia.

One author at Wikipedia has taken the time to gather together the most ridiculous 'fights' that have occurred behind the scenes. For you see, there is a forum aspect to Wikipedia where people can discuss the need to change a factoid or two. This, as one can imagine, has lead to some rather fierce and intense debates over whether Nikola Tesla was Serbian, Croatian, Austrian, or Austro-Hungarian, and whether Baltimore is a subtropical or continental climate (as the Wikipedia entry author says, at least they've agreed it isn't sub-polar).

At the bottom of this page will be the link to the Wikipedia article, but I have to highlight some of the greatest, or, in reality, stupidest arguments that have been sparked by the quest for intellectual superiority.

The Xbox 360 debate - Has Microsoft's 'Number of Xbox's sold' data been based on number of units sold to dealers, or to customers?

The Avengers -- Should there be a separate page for the new Avengers comics, as they are entitled New Avengers, or are they just a new version of the Avengers comics?

Pluto -- Is Pluto a planet, a dwarf planet, a minor planet?

Sea of Japan -- Sea of Japan, East Sea, East Sea of Korea? You tell me!

Potato Chips -- Are they flavored or flavoured? Thus, are they American in nature, or British?

Cow Tipping -- Can a photo of a cow with the description 'An unsuspecting potential victim?' be allowed without evidence that the cow is in unsuspecting danger?

And personal favorite; Cats -- What best describes the relationship between human and cat? Is it 'owner', 'caregiver', or 'human companion'? Personally, I'd have gone with 'Human Slave and Cat Overlord'…

A Geek's-Geek from Melbourne, Australia, Josh is an aspiring author with dreams of publishing his epic fantasy, currently in the works, sometime in the next 5 years. A techie, nerd, sci-fi nut and bookworm, Josh can be found at JoshSHill.com for his personal blog, or at MyWritingVoice.com for his writing blog.
Joshua can be reached at: letters@canadafreepress.com

 

Federal Debt Relief System