Wikipedia: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 19:50, 2 April 2005

Revision as of 21:12, 2 April 2005

Line 55:

German computing magazine ''[[c't]]'' performed a comparison of three encyclopedias in October 2004: ''[[Brockhaus|Brockhaus Premium]]'', ''[[Encarta|Microsoft Encarta]]'', and Wikipedia. Experts evaluated 66 articles in various fields. In overall score, Wikipedia was rated 3.6 out of 5 points ("B-"), ''Brockhaus Premium'' 3.3, and ''Microsoft Encarta'' 3.1.{{ref|Kurzidim}} In an analysis of online encyclopedias, [[Indiana University]] professors Emigh and Herring wrote that "Wikipedia improves on traditional information sources, especially for the content areas in which it is strong, such as technology and current events."{{ref|EmighHerring}}

Wikipedia has been accused of deficiencies in comprehensiveness because of its voluntary nature, and of reflecting the systemic biases of its contributors. ''Encyclopædia Britannica'' editor-in-chief Dale Hoiberg has argued that "people write of things they're interested in, and so many subjects don't get covered; and news events get covered in great detail. The entry on [[Hurricane Frances]] is five times the length of that on [[Chinese art]], and the entry on ''[[Coronation Street]]'' is twice as long as the article on [[Tony Blair]]."{{ref|Who2}} Former [[Nupedia]] editor-in-chief [[Larry Sanger]] stated in 2004, "when it comes to relatively specialized topics (outside of the interests of most of the contributors), the project's credibility is very uneven."{{ref|SangerAntiElitism}}

Its style is described by Emigh and Herring as being "largely indistinguishable" from ''[[Columbia Encyclopedia]]''. They further argue that "a few active users, when acting in concert with established norms within an open editing system, can achieve ultimate control over the content produced within the system, literally erasing diversity, controversy, and inconsistency, and homo-genizing contributors' voices." Editors on [[Wikinfo]], a fork of Wikipedia, similarly argue that new or controversial editors to Wikipedia are often unjustly labelled a "[[Internet troll|troll]]" or "problem user" and blocked from editing.{{ref|WikiInfoCritical}}