Many major American newspapers cite or recommend referring to the online encyclopedia Wikipedia (www.wikipedia.org).
Wikipedia is truly a phenomenon with a vast amount of continuously updated information, receiving approximately 60 million visits each day.
Currently, Wikipedia has about 1.5 million articles (over one-third of which are in English) across 195 languages, including Vietnamese. In addition to being an encyclopedia, Wikipedia has also expanded to include Wiktionary (a dictionary) and Wikinews (international news), among others. However…
If one understands Wikipedia through the lens of traditional encyclopedias like Larousse or Britannica, it would be a mistake. One of the incidents concerning the safety and accuracy of Wikipedia occurred in early December 2005, where information about human rights activist and former editor John Seigenthaler was altered and remained incorrect for six months before being discovered.
Since the inception of the “free encyclopedia” Wikipedia in 2001, many criticisms have emerged regularly. The idea of establishing an online reference source is excellent. The open-source policy of the Wikipedia editorial team, aimed at continuously improving the content, is even more commendable. By allowing people to contribute (through editing and revising content), Wikipedia can integrate a vast and ever-fresh amount of information.
However, this idea also has a negative side, creating a persistent sense of insecurity for users regarding the accuracy of the information (not to mention personal perspectives, especially on sensitive issues related to history and religion). In its own information, Wikipedia acknowledges the looseness and safety issues concerning its data.
In an interview with The Guardian in 2004, Encyclopaedia Britannica editor Dale Hoiberg emphasized that Wikipedia can never be placed on par with standard encyclopedias because it does not adhere to some traditional principles of encyclopedia compilation.
Nonetheless, Wikipedia should not be viewed with prejudice. When considered solely from the perspective of reference (not as a citation), Wikipedia is an excellent source. In April 2004, the German computer magazine C’T, after comparing 66 articles across various fields, rated them as follows (on a scale of 5): Brockhaus Premium (German encyclopedia) received 3.3 points; Microsoft Encarta received 3.1 points, while Wikipedia garnered 3.6 points.
In an analysis of various online encyclopedias, two professors from Indiana University, Emigh and Herring, stated that “Wikipedia improves traditional sources of information, particularly in its areas of strength, such as technology or current events.”
Moreover, due to its open-source nature, Wikipedia’s community aspect is a significant advantage over any other online encyclopedia. In May 2004, Wikipedia was awarded the Golden Nica for Digital Communities by Prix Ars Electronica and the Webby Award in the community category (from the International Institute for Digital Science and Technology, which votes for and awards the best websites). Furthermore, Wikipedia’s founder, Jimmy Wales, is still highly regarded in the American information community.
In 2005, Wales was chosen as an honorary member of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School…
Serving the public, Wikipedia is also supported by the public. Currently, Wikipedia has about 13,000 volunteers responsible for previewing all edited content. Edited information is only published after it has been reviewed by a volunteer.
The Wikipedia volunteer force comprises individuals from various backgrounds, including professors and specialists in specific fields. However, not all edited information may be thoroughly reviewed. There is no better approach than for users to maintain a constant cautious attitude.
M. KIM
