Melissa+Worthington_3.1+INF+rough+draft+page

Melissa Worthington Dr. Archibald English 110.50 30 October 2008

As I begin any research on the internet, I first arrive at Google’s homepage. Usually, when I am looking up a random fact, the first link that is shown is an article from Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a very popular encyclopedia. This free encyclopedia is used throughout the world and has become a valued source of information. Despite its popularity, some people have a problem with Wikipedia’s reliability. Because of this, Wikipedia may see problems in the future.

Wikipedia is founded and supported by a non-profit foundation called Wikimedia Foundation. As a result, any article that is added onto the Wikipedia database is free content and can be used, edited, and redistributed by any individual. Wikipedia is the combination of the words wiki and encyclopedia. According to Answers.com, the definition of a wiki is “a collaborative website whose content can be edited by anyone who has access to it.” Wikipedia is an open resource is maintained by thousands of users worldwide. Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger founded Wikipedia in 2001. It was initially supposed to be an English language project but has become a multilingual enterprise. Due to controversial topics, certain content is flagged. Occasionally, the need to freeze the option of editing these topics becomes apparent until the topic becomes neutral again. Wikipedia welcomes every individual in order to present many different views on an issue and to try to neutralize the possibility of biases from a just one demographic of contributors (Answers.com). On average, Wikipedia receives between 10,000 and 35,000 page requests per second. There are more than one hundred servers that are used in order to handle the overwhelming traffic. Since Wikipedia is so popular, it currently ranks among the top ten most-visited websites worldwide. In October of 2007, “English Wikipedia had over 2 million articles, making it the largest encyclopedia ever assembled, eclipsing even the Yongle Encyclopedia (1407), which held the record for nearly 600 years” (Answers.com). There are many sister projects since Wikipedia’s creation. Some of these projects are Wikitionary, Wikibooks, Wikiquote, and Wikisource. These are run the same way but just cover different material. For instance, Wikiquote is an encyclopedia of quotations. Anyone can publish information on the site, and like Wikipedia, it is free. Although these projects are not as popular as Wikipedia, they are newer and have not been in the public eye for enough time to be noticed yet.

Social media proves to provoke interest and support. Individuals that use Wikipedia frequently trust the site entirely; otherwise, they would find alternatives. Unfortunately, others think differently. Because Wikipedia is based off information that any person can alter or add information to, certain individuals believe that the information provided may be false. “Some commentators suggest that Wikipedia is usually reliable, but that it is not always clear how much” (Scott). There is no way to prove that the information presented on the website is correct. Since false information could be place onto Wikipedia, MediaWiki software was designed to lessen unreliable material. Maintenance is performed through volunteers in the company. Also, users that are trusted can also gain permission to maintain websites. There are three levels to maintain Wikipedia. Trusted individuals may be stewards, bureaucrats, or administrators for Wikipedia. Administrators have the most power and can delete pages, lock articles from being changed, and prevent users from editing pages.

Despite Wikipedia’s efforts to cut down on unreliable information, such information nevertheless sneaks through the system. Through certain individual’s eyes, such as Jason Scott, “they (Wikipedia’s enforcers) allow totally anonymous full-content editing by random users.” The founders of Wikipedia created the project in order for individuals to be able to participate in a free service where their information and knowledge could build the expertise needed to learn about various topics throughout the world. The cause of the problem, according to Larry Sanger (the co-founder of Wikipedia), is the lack of respect for expertise and authority. Sanger writes, “If the project participants had greater respect for expertise, there would necessarily be very little patience for those who deliberately disrupt the project. The more people who take the program seriously, the more creditable and factual information will be presented. Involving the public in the sharing of media will be beneficial as long as others do not abuse the seriousness of what is being asked of them.

All in all, Wikipedia prevails and comes out on top. Taking the lead as one of the top searched websites is an impressive achievement. As Larry Sanger concluded, “Perhaps Wikipedia is better described as one of those sources regarded as unreliable which people read anyway.” Although Wikipedia may be expressed as unreliable in some cases, the program still conveys the strength to overcome such flaws and stand out as a reliable source of information.

-- Peer Review by Liz Simon

____What is the thesis?____   Wikipedia is a popular web-based encyclopedia used by millions, if not billions, of people but some people see problems with it.

__How Is The Essay Organized?______    Opening paragraph - history of wiki - how/why topics are flagged - other wiki services - questioning reliability - MediaWiki software - Administrators - Explanations for the unreliable material - still one of the best known sources of information.

____Was The Organization Logical?______ Yes it was organized conceptually. You might want to break up the larger paragraphs, right now it is basically 5 paragraphs including the opening and closing. Just a thought, not a requirement though.

____Were Any Parts Not Relevant to The Thesis?______  Nothing jumps out at me as seriously out of place. I would just give each topic it's own space. Like in the second paragraph where the sentence starts "Due to controversial topics...." that sentence and the next couple talk about freezing and the number of changes per second. I would just make it it's own paragraph. But again, this might just be a stylistic thing that I look at differently.

What Examples and Types of Evidence are Most Convincing?______  The history of Wiki is something I had never considered, and reading about what the original concept was, and what it has become is interesting. I also liked that you have already worked your citations in there, I particularly liked the quotes from Larry Sanger since he was a founder.

What Two Places Could Use More Development?______ In the first paragraph it mentions that Wikipedia could run into problems in the future, but it is not really addressed in the body of the paper. So you could add something about what the future holds for them. It went from explaining how Wiki allows users from varying demographic backgrounds to add info, and then goes to page requests in the next sentence. Is a page request the same thing as just editing a page? I am guessing no, but I felt confused in that section. Other than that I would just look over it with a fresh set of eyes. I tell everyone that, because we all notice things we can refine when we go back a few days later.

Did the Introduction Catch Your Attention?__ I think the first paragraph does a good job of setting the stage for your essay. I could tell what you were going to write about, and it did catch my interest since I know nothing about Wikipedia. This topic is very relevant to college students who are constantly writing, so it was a good choice to write about.