Joho the Blog
|
|
|
November 18, 2006
Wikimania, the Wikipedia conference, will be held in Taipei next August. Wikimania 2006 was held at Harvard and was a fascinating event. Wikipedia is one of those phenomena that seems to be without bottom: There's always some group wrapped up in a level one deeper than you knew about. I don't think I'll make it to Taipei for this one, but I'm sure I'll regret it. Meanwhile, a happy front-page story by Robert Weisman in the Boston Globe touts the spread of wikis. It begins well with a quote from Dan Bricklin, but for some reason, it takes Wikipedia as an example of a wiki that "stumbled" and as a "fiasco." Why? Because "it had to deputize a cleanup crew to enforce quality standards, catch mistakes, and restore stories altered by pranksters or partisans." Isn't that a bit like saying the Boston Globe is a fiasco because it has had to hire a cleanup crew to enforce quality standards, catch mistakes, and check facts? There are obviously problems with Wikipedia, and it's subject to a type of error that mainstream encyclopedias are not, but it also has strengths, including its topicality, the amount it covers, its linked architecture, and its ability to correct itself quickly. I do not believe that history is going to put Wikipedia into the fiasco category. [Tags: wikipedia wikimania wikis] Posted
by D. Weinberger at November 18, 2006 10:37 AM
|
Comments
The problem is not with them ... it's with us. If you had to name a consistent negative behavior pattern within humans it would be the desire to control everything -- as in, "Yes, it really is all about me, isn't it?" Wikipedia, even with all its strengths, calls to the graffiti-er like a blank wall ... the lowrider like a 5,000 watt stereo ... all with the singleminded attempt at saying, "Look at me! Look at me, mommy!" The difficulty is, you see, that when mommy wouldn't look, gaping empty spaces were created in these folks and we're left to deal with the consequences.
As for the Internet itself, it needs to grow up. It' s getting a bit late in the game for having to remind people that were it not for some late-arriving technology the Internet would have been invented not by Al Gore, but by P.T. Barnum himself. With that I ask you, when did the term "caveat emptor" seem more relevant?
Wikipedia isn't s failure, but neither is it a stunning success. If I must trust my information, I'll go to a trusted source -- it's as simple as that. After all, there's even some good looking graffiti around, but I wouldn't want it hanging over my fireplace, if you see what I'm saying..
Posted by: F.William | November 18, 2006 02:09 PM