Tag Archives: wikipedia

For This Author, 10,000 Wikipedia Articles Is a Good Day’s Work

“Sverker Johansson could be the most prolific author you’ve never heard of. Volunteering his time over the past seven years publishing to Wikipedia, the 53-year-old Swede can take credit for 2.7 million articles, or 8.5% of the entire collection, according to Wikimedia analytics, which measures the site’s traffic. His stats far outpace any other user, the group says. He has been particularly prolific cataloging obscure animal species, including butterflies and beetles, and is proud of his work highlighting towns in the Philippines. About one-third of his entries are uploaded to the Swedish language version of Wikipedia, and the rest are composed in two versions of Filipino, one of which is his wife’s native tongue.” (via WSJ)

Leave a Comment

Wikipedia pops up in bibliographies, and even college curricula

“All through high school, Ani Schug was told to steer clear of Wikipedia. Her teachers talked about the popular online encyclopedia “as if it wasn’t serious or trustworthy” and suggested it only be used as a tip sheet. Imagine her surprise this spring when her American politics professor at Pomona College assigned the class to write detailed entries for Wikipedia instead of traditional term papers. Turns out it was a lot harder than the students anticipated. Their projects had to be researched, composed and coded to match Wikipedia’s strict protocols. Schug and her classmates wound up citing 218 scholarly legal and newspaper sources for their entry on a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing corporate donations for ballot initiative campaigns.” (via Los Angeles Times)

Leave a Comment

New Wikipedia for Android app now in Beta

“The Wikipedia for Android app has a new look, and you can help test its new reading and editing features! The Wikimedia Foundation Mobile Apps team has just released a beta version of a new Android app to the Google Play Store. This native app features a major design update and focuses on creating a faster and more immersive browsing and reading experience. We’ve added a history of recently viewed articles, so you can figure out how searching for that hot new Summer blockbuster led you to reading about the developmental biology of the jellyfish. We’re also featuring an interactive table of contents to help you navigate long articles and get you to the information you need faster and easier.” (via Wikimedia blog)

Leave a Comment

Wikipedia Is NOT A Doctor — And A Study Confirms It

“Your high school teacher said it best: Wikipedia is not a reliable source. The online encyclopedia that can be edited by experts and idiots alike is an easy source of information when trying to learn about a new topic. But a new study confirms what we all (hopefully) already know: Many entries — especially medical entries — contain false information, so don’t use Wikipedia in place of a doctor. Dr. Robert Hasty of Campbell University in North Carolina, along with a team of researchers, published the study in this month’s issue of the Journal of the American Osteopathic Association. The study calls the information published in 20,000-plus medical-related Wikipedia entries into question.” (via Huffington Post It)

Comments Off

Can Wikipedia Ever Be a Definitive Medical Text?

“Every time I panic unreasonably over some minor bodily abnormality—which is often—I take to the Internet. I’m far from the only one—72 percent of Internet users have looked online for health information in the past year, according to Pew Research. And though as a responsible health editor, I should of course say that if you really think something’s wrong, you should go to the doctor, I know that even if you do go to the doctor, chances are you’ll Google whatever she tells you anyway. Wikipedia being the sixth-largest site on the whole wide Internet, these people searching for medical information online are often going to end up there. Whether or not they should be doing it, they are. I am. Patients are, and so are doctors. Which is why efforts to improve the quality of Wikipedia’s medical information are important—if you can’t lead people away from the fountain of crowd-sourced knowledge, you can at least try to unmuddy the waters.” (via The Atlantic)

Comments Off

UC Berkeley grad to expand Wikipedia’s scholarly offerings

“Kevin Gorman is the proverbial walking encyclopedia – the kind of guy who can explain the significance of the Winter War of 1939, but also name nearly every species in the fungus kingdom. Gorman, 22, UC Berkeley Class of ’13, spent his youth guzzling up the pages of Encyclopedia Britannica before eventually becoming a full-blown Wikipedia fanatic. Now Gorman is UC Berkeley’s official Wikipedian-in-Residence, a liaison of sorts between the hallowed halls of academia and that essential ingredient in so many last-minute term papers. In short, his charge is to improve the quality and quantity of information on the collaborative online encyclopedia. It is the first post of its kind at a university.” (via SFGate)

Comments Off

Harvard Is Hiring Someone to Post on Wikipedia All Day

“If you enjoy scouring Wikipedia all day, making sure that posts are accurate and information entered into the database isn’t fudging important historical facts and details, then Harvard’s Houghton Library has a job for you. They’re seeking a “Wikipedian-in-residence,” or, to better describe what that means, a person who will “dedicate time to working in-house at an organization” to create new pages and update existing pages on the encyclopedia-esque website.” (via Boston Magazine)

Leave a Comment

The future of Wikipedia: WikiPeaks?

“IN 2012, after 244 years in print, Encyclopedia Britannica became online-only. Now a group of German fans of Wikipedia, an online, user-generated encyclopedia, are raising money for a move in the opposite direction. A print version of the English Wikipedia—1,000 bulky volumes and 1,193,014 pages—will be on show at a gathering of Wikipedians later this year. A world tour will probably follow: a global victory lap for the internet’s most impressive crowd-sourced creation.” (via The Economist)

Comments Off

Dr. Wikipedia: The ‘Double-Edged Sword’ Of Crowd-Sourced Medicine

“Wikipedia has become a go-to source for definitions, celebrity facts, and now, medical information. A study by the IMS Health Institute published in January names Wikipedia as the “single leading source” of health care information for both patients and health care professionals. Unfortunately, some of that information is wrong. “I think that’s the double-edged sword of Wikipedia,” Dr. Amin Azzam tells NPR’s Arun Rath. “Because anyone can edit, we don’t necessarily know the expertise of the people doing the editing. One the other hand, the reason it’s so popular is because everyone can contribute.” (via NPR)

Comments Off

Wikipedia Becomes a Battleground for Art Activism

“Artist-philosopher Adrian Piper wants her Wikipedia page gone. She finds its portrayal of her inaccurate, and she has never cared to compromise about anything. Early in her career, following the invasion of Cambodia and the Kent State protests, she pulled artwork from a show at New York Cultural Center, asking that it be replaced by a sign citing “the inability of art expression to have a meaningful existence under conditions other than those of peace, equality, truth, trust and freedom.” Last summer, she sent an email to Wikimedia Foundation, which runs the massive, volunteer-edited encyclopedia, asking that her page be deleted.” (via LA Weekly)

Comments Off

© Copyright 2014, Information Today, Inc., All rights reserved.