Tag Archives: street-journal

Wikipedia is a very useful site for anyone looking to find information on any given topic. Chances are that you have used it for research at one time or another. Even if you don't start by going directly to Wikipedia, results from the site are often at the top of search results in Google, and you'll get there anyway. Those Google results likely play a significant role, but Wikipedia's popularity is as great as ever. Right now, it is cited as the fifth most popular site in the entire world. It gets 325 million monthly visitors , and the number of visitors grew 20% in the 12 months ending in September, according to the Wall Street Journal , citing data from comScore. The WSJ also says that the number of editors Wikipedia has is dwindling. They say that Wikipedia lost over 49,000 editors in the first three months of 2009 alone. During the same period the previous year, Wikipedia lost only 4,900 (WSJ attributes these figures to Spanish researcher Felipe Ortega. His thesis on the subject can be found here [pdf]). The accuracy of information on Wikipedia has always been something to be leery of, simply because of the open format of it. If you give the public access to things, some people will abuse it. Even if their intentions aren't bad, they may still just post inaccurate information. Wikipedia's has taken measures over time to try and weed out the bad, by making stricter policies for content addition. These days, altering or contributing to Wikipedia content is no easy feat. With such a drastic loss in editors, one has to wonder if accuracy of information will suffer. Will there continue to be enough people to keep Wikipedia updated with accurate information across the board? "We need sufficient people to do the work that needs to be done," says Sue Gardner, executive director of the Wikimedia foundation is quoted as saying. "But the purpose of the project is not participation." It is the implementation of Wikipedia's measures for cleaning up the site that is the focus of many people's speculation on why it is losing so many editors. Basically, it's just become too strict. However, there are also suggestions that Wikipedia is simply getting full, content wise - there is a lack of new topics that require entries. There's no question that there are entries out there yet to be created, and a whole lot more that could use additional information added to them, but are the right people available to add that information? Are the right people granted access to do so? Let's hope that Wikipedia is able to maintain the highest level of accuracy possible, moving into the future. It needs to continue to improve, not get worse. It's a useful resource, despite its flaws, and the world knows it - hence the site's enormous popularity. If accuracy becomes more of a problem, it could have a harmful impact on what is perceived to be knowledge in general. People taking inaccurate information for fact can be a dangerous thing. Continue reading →