Podcast Summary
Wikipedia's significance: Despite criticisms, Wikipedia's vast size and continuous editing process make it a valuable resource with over 62 million articles and 4 billion monthly visitors.
While Wikipedia has faced criticism for its reliability due to the ability for anyone to edit its content, it is the largest reference work ever created with over 62 million articles in 300 plus languages, 4 billion plus visitors a month, and 14 million edits made each month. Despite its size and popularity, the hosts of Stuff You Should Know have historically avoided using it as a source due to its unreliability and potential influence on their reporting. However, after further research, one of the hosts has come to a more accepting view of Wikipedia, recognizing its value as a resource and the efforts of its community of editors. Wikipedia's impressive statistics demonstrate its significance and the impact of its continuous editing process.
Wikipedia's origin: Started as an experiment in the mid-1990s, Wikipedia evolved from an open-source web directory to a free encyclopedia with a strong emphasis on truth and correctness, now available in hundreds of languages and funded by donations.
Wikipedia is a free, open-source, and volunteer-driven project that has grown into the largest reference work in history. Started as an experiment in the mid-1990s, it began as a web ring, an open-source version of Yahoo!'s web directory. Initially focused on niche topics, it evolved into something much larger when its founders, Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger, envisioned creating a free encyclopedia. Unlike other websites that sell ads against their free content, Wikipedia places a strong emphasis on truth and correctness. It is now available in hundreds of languages, making it an essential resource for people around the world. Despite its massive operating budget of approximately $168 million per year, it remains ad-free and relies on donations from its users. Wikipedia's success is a testament to the power of collaboration and the human desire to share knowledge.
Newpedia vs Wikipedia: Newpedia's failure was due to its slow publication process while Wikipedia's success came from its wiki model's ability to rapidly publish user-generated content
The failure of Newpedia, an early online encyclopedia, was due to its slow publication process, which contrasted with the rapid growth of user-generated content through the wiki concept. Ward Cunningham, a software engineer, is credited with creating the first wiki in the early 1990s as a way for programmers to collaborate. He later realized the potential of this concept for larger projects and coined the term "wiki." In 1999, Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales, who had been working on a traditional encyclopedia project called Newpedia, were introduced to the wiki concept. Sanger claimed he came up with the idea of applying it to their encyclopedia project, while Wales' employee, Jeremy Rosenfeld, also made this suggestion. Regardless, within two weeks of this encounter, Wikipedia was born, using the wiki model and eschewing the traditional publishing process that had slowed down Newpedia. The rapid growth of user-generated content through the wiki model ultimately proved to be a more successful approach for creating and sharing knowledge online.
9/11 attacks and Wikipedia: The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks marked a turning point for Wikipedia, with the site providing accurate and up-to-date information during a time when many other sites crashed. The article on the attacks became a cornerstone for Wikipedia's development, shaping its content and setting the tone for how it would function moving forward.
The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks marked a pivotal moment in Wikipedia's history. The site, which was still new and growing, became the go-to source for information during a time when many other sites crashed under the weight of heavy traffic. With its simple, ad-free layout, Wikipedia was able to provide accurate and up-to-date information on the tragedy, leading more people to discover and contribute to the platform. The September 11th, 2001 terrorist attack article on Wikipedia became the cornerstone of the site's development, with discussions and edits shaping the content and setting the tone for how Wikipedia would function moving forward. The archived discussions surrounding the article offer insight into the controversies and debates that arose during this time, highlighting the significance of this event in Wikipedia's history.
Wikipedia's response to 9/11 attacks: The 9/11 attacks shaped Wikipedia's identity and values, leading to the establishment of neutrality as a pillar and rejection of advertising. Criticisms prompted the departure of co-founder Larry Sanger, but the platform's unique characteristics allow for diverse perspectives and ongoing debates, making it a trusted source for knowledge.
The Wikipedia community's response to the 9/11 attacks played a pivotal role in shaping the platform's identity and values. During this time, they established the five pillars, including neutrality, which set Wikipedia apart as a source for factual, objective information. However, criticisms of bias and lack of structure led to the departure of co-founder Larry Sanger. Wikipedia also rejected the idea of advertising and instead formed the Wikimedia Foundation. The platform's unique characteristics, such as no firm rules or single point of control, allow for diverse perspectives and ongoing debates, contributing to its richness and depth. Despite criticisms, Wikipedia's commitment to neutrality and community-driven content has made it a go-to source for knowledge.
Wikipedia's success factors: Assumption of good faith and respectful communication maintain neutrality and foster collaboration, enabling constant evolution and improvement of content in Wikipedia
Wikipedia's success lies in its evolving nature as a free, community-driven encyclopedia. Despite the potential for disagreements and conflicts among editors, the assumption of good faith and the pillar of treating each other with respect help maintain neutrality and foster a collaborative environment. This setup allows for constant evolution and improvement of the content, making Wikipedia a valuable and reliable source of information. Additionally, the freedom and openness of the platform can be challenging for those who have created niche entries they care deeply about, but it is a necessary aspect of the platform's success.
Wikipedia issues: Wikipedia faces challenges such as vandalism, spamming, bullying, and harassment, but its vast size and self-correcting community enable access to high-quality information, requiring users to approach content critically and verify from multiple sources.
While Wikipedia operates under an assumption of good faith, there are instances of deliberate vandalism, spamming, bullying, and harassment that can disrupt the collaborative process of building an encyclopedia. These issues are addressed by volunteer administrators who have the power to issue temporary blocks or permanent bans. Anyone can edit Wikipedia, but there are risks associated with inaccuracies and unreliability. The platform is not considered a reliable source for academic research due to the potential for errors and the low percentage of featured articles compared to the total number. Despite these challenges, Wikipedia's vast size and the self-correcting nature of its community allow for a wealth of high-quality information to be accessible to the public. However, it's important to approach the content with a critical eye and verify information from multiple sources.
Wikipedia biases: Wikipedia, relying on user-generated content, can have biases and errors, particularly in gender representation and notable figures. Initiatives like edit-athons and tutorials for new editors aim to address these issues, and Wikipedia remains a valuable starting point for research despite occasional errors.
While Wikipedia can be a valuable resource for information, it's important to remember that it's not infallible and can be subject to biases, particularly in terms of gender and notable figures. The platform relies heavily on user-generated content, and the demographics of its editors can impact the representation and coverage of certain topics. However, Wikipedia has taken steps to address these issues through initiatives like edit-athons and tutorials for new editors. A notable example of Wikipedia's potential for error is the hoax entry about John Seigelthaler, which damaged its reputation for a time. Despite this, Wikipedia has come into its own as a starting point for research and continues to be a popular and widely used resource. If you're interested in editing Wikipedia, there are resources available to help you get started. And who knows, your contributions could inspire others to pursue their own passions, like Nathan and Brent's love for bonsai trees.