Dr. Mark Humphrys

School of Computing. Dublin City University.

Home      Blog      Teaching      Research      Contact

Search:

CA249      CA318      CA425      CA651

w2mind.computing.dcu.ie      w2mind.org


Mark Humphrys - "Why on earth would I link to you?" - Follow-up - In defence of Wikipedia


In defence of Wikipedia

Wikipedia has become my preferred destination for links. Yes there are major problems with it, and something much better could be imagined.

But on balance, it is better than the alternatives.


In defence of Wikipedia:

I link a lot to Wikipedia now. Yes I know it can be edited by anyone, and all information needs to be cross-checked, and entries regularly are vandalised, but here's why I still link to it:

  1. Vandals are usually discovered quickly, because so many people are watching the page. Re-load a little later and the vandalism is gone, and the vandal banned.
  2. Vandalism may be only a short-term problem. I trust that the software will improve so that, as on eBay, authors can build a long-term reputation, and we can choose views to see all authors, or only those above a certain quality. There are many software ways that Wikipedia can improve, and I think it will, and I can keep my links to it.
  3. Even where information is sketchy, I still link to Wikipedia for the external links sections, which is for many topics better quality, better maintained, and more up to date than Yahoo or Open Directory. View the Wikipedia link as a starting point for exploration, not a destination.
  4. Wikipedia is so up-to-date because so many people are always working on it. Whereas Yahoo, for example, has some directory categories that have not been edited in years.
  5. Links are so simple in format:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topic
    that: (1) you can actually guess them, and: (2) it looks like they will never need to be changed, whereas Yahoo and Open Directory re-organise their directory structures regularly and break links.

Criticism of Wikipedia


Wikipedia is flawed, but better than the alternatives:

The whole Wikipedia debate points out that, even today, so many years after the start of the Web, there is still no perfect site to link to.




Side-by-side comparison of Shakespeare in Yahoo, Open Directory and Wikipedia




Future alternatives to Wikipedia


Could you cite Wikipedia in a paper?

Answer: No.

Use Wikipedia as a starting point to find a real, stable, author-identified source that you can cite.

Wikipedia themselves say: "Normal academic usage of Wikipedia .. is for getting the general facts of a problem and to gather keywords, references and bibliographical pointers, but not as a source in itself."




"Professor Wikipedia" shows up many of Wikipedia's flaws.
(And yet everyone is at his class, and no one is at Professor Britannica's lectures.)
Warning: Some vulgarity.




Feeds      HumphrysFamilyTree.com

Bookmark and Share           On Internet since 1987.