I love Wikipedia because…
April 27, 2007 by Pareen
Just for three reasons…first is its simplicity and second is high standards of reliability.
Whats the third one? Wait! First let me explain the first two…
SIMPLICITY
We all know how simple it is to use Wikipedia - except a lot of undesirable links in text; but they ought to be there for reference in an encyclopedia.
RELIABILITY (the most important one!)
Today, we can get information on almost any topic on the Internet. But, there aren’t many reliable sources at the same time. Wikipedia bridges the gap.
It is reliable for following reasons:
-
Neutral point of view is a fundamental Wikipedia principle. According to Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, NPOV is “absolute and non-negotiable.” All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), representing fairly and without bias all significant views (that have been published by reliable sources).
-
The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. “Verifiable” in this context means that any reader should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed.
-
Original research (OR) is a term used in Wikipedia to refer to unpublished facts, arguments, concepts, statements, or theories. The term also applies to any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that appears to advance a position — or, in the words of Wikipedia’s co-founder Jimmy Wales, would amount to a “novel narrative or historical interpretation.” Wikipedia is not the place for original research. Citing sources and avoiding original research are inextricably linked: the only way to demonstrate that you are not presenting original research is to cite reliable sources that provide information directly related to the topic of the article, and to adhere to what those sources say.
-
Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia and, as a means to that end, an online community of people interested in building a high-quality encyclopedia in a spirit of mutual respect. Therefore, there are certain things that Wikipedia is not.
o 1.1 Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia
o 1.2 Wikipedia is not a dictionary
o 1.3 Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought
o 1.4 Wikipedia is not a soapbox
o 1.5 Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files
o 1.6 Wikipedia is not a blog, webspace provider, or social networking site
o 1.7 Wikipedia is not a directory
o 1.8 Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information
o 1.9 Wikipedia is not a crystal ball
o 1.10 Wikipedia is not censored
· What the Wikipedia community is not
o 2.1 Wikipedia is not a battleground
o 2.2 Wikipedia is not an anarchy
o 2.3 Wikipedia is not a democracy
o 2.4 Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy
These points have been taken directly from Wikipedia’s policy page. Most of the time we do not even know what their policy is. And after knowing this, I don’t need to say a word on its reliablity.
OPEN SOURCE/FREE INFORMATION
The third reason is that it is under GNU public licence. Not only can anyone who has information on any topic post/edit/update it, but also all the content is available for free - copyleft.
Bookmark this post:
Comments/Feedback/Criticism/Suggestions will be appreciated
