Difference between revisions of "En.wikipedia"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(New page: '''Wikipedia''' (pronunciation {{spoken}}) is a free,<ref>Some versions such as the English one contain non-free images.</ref> [[...)
 
(removing all text (copied from banned site); redirecting)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
−
'''Wikipedia''' ([[Wikipedia (terminology)#Pronunciation|pronunciation]] {{spoken}}) is a [[Free content|free]],<ref>Some versions such as the English one contain non-free images.</ref> [[multilingualism|multilingual]], [[open content]] [[encyclopedia]] project operated by the [[United States]]-based [[non-profit organization|non-profit]] [[Wikimedia Foundation]]. Its name is a [[portmanteau]] of the words ''[[wiki]]'' (a technology for creating collaborative websites) and ''encyclopedia''. Launched in 2001 by [[Jimmy Wales]] and [[Larry Sanger]],<ref name="Miliard">{{cite news|url=http://www.slweekly.com/index.cfm?do=article.details&id=37BD3969-14D1-13A2-9F5EEAF5A79E0898|title=Wikipediots: Who are these devoted, even obsessive contributors to Wikipedia?|accessdate=2008-02-21|date=2008-03-01 |publisher=[[Salt Lake City Weekly]]|first=Mike|last=Miliard}}</ref> it attempts to collect and summarize all human [[knowledge]] in every major language.<ref>[http://interviews.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/07/28/1351230]</ref>
+
#REDIRECT [[Wikipedia]]
−
 
 
−
As of [[April 2008]], Wikipedia had over 10&nbsp;million articles in 253 languages, about a quarter of which are in English.<ref name="ListOfWikipedias">{{cite web | url = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics | title = Statistics | publisher = [[English Wikipedia]] | accessdate = 2008-06-21 }}</ref> Wikipedia's articles have been written [[collaboration|collaboratively]] by [[volunteer]]s around the world, and nearly all of its articles can be edited by anyone with access to the Wikipedia website.<ref>In some parts of the world, the access to Wikipedia has (or had) been blocked.</ref> Having steadily risen in popularity since its inception,<ref name="AlexaStats">{{cite web | url = http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/wikipedia.org?range=5y&size=large&y=t | title = Five-year traffic statistics for wikipedia.org | publisher = [[Alexa Internet]] | accessdate = 2008-07-15 }}</ref> it is currently the largest and most [[popular]] general [[reference work]] on the [[Internet]].<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1595184,00.html|title=Look Who's Using Wikipedia|first=Bill|last=Tancer|date=2007-05-01|publisher=''[[Time (magazine)|Time]]''|accessdate=2007-12-01|quote=The sheer volume of content [...] is partly responsible for the site's dominance as an online reference. When compared to the top 3,200 educational reference sites in the U.S., Wikipedia is #1, capturing 24.3% of all visits to the category}}  ([http://weblogs.hitwise.com/bill-tancer/2007/03/wikipedia_search_and_school_ho.html the author's blog post on the article])</ref><ref name="go-to site">{{cite news |url=http://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSN0819429120070708 |title=Wikipedia remains go-to site for online news |date=2007-07-08 |accessdate=2007-12-16 |first=Alex |last=Woodson |publisher=''[[Reuters]]'' |quote=Online encyclopedia Wikipedia has added about 20 million unique monthly visitors in the past year, making it the top online news and information destination, according to Nielsen//NetRatings.}}</ref><ref name=AlexaTop500 />
 
−
 
 
−
[[Criticism of Wikipedia|Critics of Wikipedia]] target its [[systemic bias]] and inconsistencies<ref name="SangerElitism" /> and its policy of favoring [[consensus]] over [[credential]]s in its editorial process.<ref name="AcademiaAndWikipedia">{{cite web | url = http://many.corante.com/archives/2005/01/04/academia_and_wikipedia.php | title = Academia and Wikipedia | accessdate = 2007-02-11 | author = [[Danah Boyd]] | publisher = Many-to-Many | date = [[2005-01-04]] }} {{Rs|date=April 2008}}</ref> [[Reliability of Wikipedia|Wikipedia's reliability and accuracy]] are also an issue.<ref name="Who">{{cite web | url = http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2004/oct/26/g2.onlinesupplement | title = Who knows? | accessdate = 2007-02-11 | author = Simon Waldman | publisher = ''[[The Guardian]]'' | date = [[2004-10-26]] }}</ref> Other criticisms are centered on its susceptibility to [[vandalism]] and the addition of spurious or unverified information.<ref name="DeathByWikipedia" /> Scholarly work suggests that vandalism is generally short-lived.<ref name="MIT_IBM_study">{{cite journal |
 
−
| author = Fernanda B. Viégas, Martin Wattenberg, Kushal Dave
 
−
| title = Studying Cooperation and Conflict between Authors with History Flow Visualizations
 
−
| journal = Proceedings of the [[CHI (conference)|SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems]]
 
−
| id = ISBN 1-58113-702-8
 
−
| pages = p. 575–582
 
−
| location = Vienna, Austria
 
−
|date= 2004
 
−
| format = [[Portable Document Format|PDF]]
 
−
| accessdate = 2007-01-24
 
−
| url = http://alumni.media.mit.edu/~fviegas/papers/history_flow.pdf
 
−
}}</ref><ref name="CreatingDestroyingAndRestoringValue">{{cite journal
 
−
| author =Reid Priedhorsky, Jilin Chen, Shyong (Tony) K. Lam, Katherine Panciera, Loren Terveen, John Riedl
 
−
| title =Creating, Destroying, and Restoring Value in Wikipedia
 
−
| journal =[[Association for Computing Machinery]] GROUP '07 conference proceedings
 
−
| location =Sanibel Island, Florida, USA.
 
−
|date=2007-11-04
 
−
| url =http://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~reid/papers/group282-priedhorsky.pdf
 
−
| accessdate =2007-10-13}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
In addition to being an encyclopedic reference, Wikipedia has received major media attention as an online source of breaking news as it is constantly updated.<ref>{{cite news
 
−
| url = http://www10.nytimes.com/2007/07/01/magazine/01WIKIPEDIA-t.html?_r=5&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
 
−
| title = All the News That's Fit to Print Out
 
−
| author = Jonathan Dee
 
−
| publisher = The New York Times Magazine
 
−
|date=2007-07-01
 
−
|accessdate=2007-12-01}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal
 
−
| author = Andrew Lih
 
−
| title = Wikipedia as Participatory Journalism: Reliable Sources? Metrics for evaluating collaborative media as a news resource
 
−
| journal = 5th International Symposium on Online Journalism
 
−
| location = University of Texas at Austin
 
−
|date=2004-04-16
 
−
| url = http://jmsc.hku.hk/faculty/alih/publications/utaustin-2004-wikipedia-rc2.pdf
 
−
| accessdate =2007-10-13}}</ref>
 
−
When ''[[Time (magazine)|Time Magazine]]'' recognized "[[You (Time Person of the Year)|You]]" as its ''[[Time Person of the Year|Person of the Year]]'' 2006, praising the accelerating success of on-line collaboration and interaction by millions of users around the world, Wikipedia was the first particular "[[Web 2.0]]" service mentioned, followed by [[YouTube]] and [[MySpace]].<ref name="ME!">{{cite news| date=[[2006-12-13]]| url= http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html |title= Time's Person of the Year: You |publisher= ''[[Time (magazine)|Time]]''}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
==History==
 
−
{{main|History of Wikipedia}}
 
−
[[Image:ImageNupedia.png|thumb|left|Wikipedia originally developed from another encyclopedia project, [[Nupedia]].]]
 
−
Wikipedia began as a complementary project for [[Nupedia]], a free online [[English language|English-language]] encyclopedia project whose articles were written by experts and reviewed under a formal process. Nupedia was founded on [[March 9]], [[2000]], under the ownership of [[Bomis|Bomis, Inc]], a [[web portal]] company. Its main figures were [[Jimmy Wales]], Bomis [[Chief executive officer|CEO]], and [[Larry Sanger]], [[Editing|editor-in-chief]] for Nupedia and later Wikipedia. Nupedia was licensed initially under its own [[Nupedia Open Content License]], switching to the [[GNU Free Documentation License]] before Wikipedia's founding at the urging of [[Richard Stallman]].<ref name="stallman1999">{{cite web
 
−
|url=http://www.gnu.org/encyclopedia/encyclopedia.html
 
−
|title=The Free Encyclopedia Project
 
−
|accessdate=2008-01-04
 
−
|last=Stallman
 
−
|first=Richard M.
 
−
|authorlink=Richard Stallman
 
−
|date=2007-06-20
 
−
|publisher=[[Free Software Foundation]]}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
[[Image:EnglishWikipediaArticleCountGraph linear.png‎|thumb|right|Graph of the article count for the English Wikipedia, from January 10, 2001, to September 9, 2007 (the date of the two-millionth article)]]
 
−
[[Image:2008wikipediaVisitors.PNG|thumb|right|Visitors to ''wikipedia.org'' in 2008]]
 
−
Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales are the founders of Wikipedia.<ref name="projectorigins"/><ref name="Sanger-NYTimes">
 
−
{{cite news
 
−
|first=Peter
 
−
|last=Meyers
 
−
|title=Fact-Driven? Collegial? This Site Wants You
 
−
|url=http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9800E5D6123BF933A1575AC0A9679C8B63&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fSubjects%2fC%2fComputer%20Software
 
−
|publisher=''[[The New York Times]]''
 
−
|date=[[September 20]], [[2001]]
 
−
|accessdate=2007-11-22}}<small>"I can start an article that will consist of one paragraph, and then a real expert will come along and add three paragraphs and clean up my one paragraph," said Larry Sanger of Las Vegas, who founded Wikipedia with Mr. Wales.</small></ref> While Wales is credited with defining the goal of making a publicly editable encyclopedia,<ref name="SangerMemoir" /> Sanger is usually credited with the [[Intuition (knowledge)|counter-intuitive]] [[strategy]] of using a [[wiki]] to reach that goal.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2001-October/000671.html|title=Wikipedia-l: LinkBacks?|accessdate=2007-02-20}}</ref> On [[January 10]], [[2001]], [[Larry Sanger]] proposed on the Nupedia [[mailing list]] to create a wiki as a "feeder" project for Nupedia.<ref>{{cite news |author=[[Larry Sanger]] |title=Let's make a wiki |date=[[January 10]], [[2001]] |publisher=Internet Archive |url=http://web.archive.org/web/20030414014355/http://www.nupedia.com/pipermail/nupedia-l/2001-January/000676.html}}</ref>
 
−
Wikipedia was formally launched on [[January 15]], [[2001]], as a single English-language edition at www.wikipedia.com,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://web.archive.org/web/20010331173908/http://www.wikipedia.com/ |title=Wikipedia: HomePage |accessdate= 2001-03-31}}</ref> and announced by Sanger on the Nupedia mailing list.<ref>{{cite news |author=[[Larry Sanger]] |title=Wikipedia is up! |date=[[January 17]], [[2001]] |publisher=Internet Archive |url=http://web.archive.org/web/20010506042824/www.nupedia.com/pipermail/nupedia-l/2001-January/000684.html}}</ref>
 
−
Wikipedia's policy of "neutral point-of-view"<ref name="NPOV">"[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view&oldid=102236018 Wikipedia:Neutral point of view], Wikipedia (21 January 2007)</ref> was codified in its initial months, and was similar to Nupedia's earlier "nonbiased" policy. Otherwise, there were relatively few rules initially and Wikipedia operated independently of Nupedia.<ref name="SangerMemoir">{{cite news |author=[[Larry Sanger]] |title=The Early History of Nupedia and Wikipedia: A Memoir|date=[[April 18]], [[2005]] |publisher=[[Slashdot]] |url=http://features.slashdot.org/features/05/04/18/164213.shtml}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
Wikipedia gained early contributors from Nupedia, [[Slashdot]] postings, and [[Web search engine|search engine]] indexing. It grew to approximately 20,000 articles, and 18 language editions, by the end of 2001. By late 2002 it had reached 26 language editions, 46 by the end of 2003, and 161 by the final days of 2004.<ref>"[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Multilingual_statistics Multilingual statistics]", Wikipedia, [[March 30]], [[2005]]</ref> Nupedia and Wikipedia coexisted until the former's servers went down permanently in 2003, and its text was incorporated into Wikipedia. [[English Wikipedia]] passed the 2,000,000-article mark on [[September 9]], [[2007]], making it the largest encyclopedia ever assembled, eclipsing even the [[Yongle Encyclopedia]] (1407), which had held the record for exactly 600&nbsp;years.<ref name="EB_encyclopedia">{{cite encyclopedia |title=Encyclopedias and Dictionaries |encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica, 15th ed. |publisher= Encyclopædia Britannica |date=2007 |volume=18 |pages=257–286}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
Citing fears of commercial advertising and lack of control in a perceived English-centric Wikipedia, users of the [[Spanish Wikipedia]] forked from Wikipedia to create the ''[[Enciclopedia Libre]]'' in February 2002.<ref>{{cite web|title=
 
−
 
 
−
[long] Enciclopedia Libre: msg#00008|url=http://osdir.com/ml/science.linguistics.wikipedia.international/2003-03/msg00008.html|work=Osdir}}</ref> Later that year, Wales announced that Wikipedia would not display advertisements, and its website was moved to wikipedia.org.<ref>{{cite book|last=Shirky|first=Clay|authorlink=Clay Shirky|title=Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations|pages=273|date=[[February 28]], [[2008]]|publisher=The Penguin Press via Amazon Online Reader|url=http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1594201536/ref=sib_dp_srch_pop?v=search-inside&keywords=spanish&go.x=0&go.y=0&go=Go%21#|isbn=1-594201-53-6}}</ref> Various other projects have since forked from Wikipedia for editorial reasons. [[Wikinfo]] does not require neutral point of view and allows original research. New Wikipedia-inspired projects — such as [[Citizendium]], [[Scholarpedia]], [[Conservapedia]] and Google's [[Knol]] — have been started to address perceived limitations of Wikipedia, such as its policies on [[peer review]], [[original research]] and commercial [[advertising]].
 
−
 
 
−
The [[Wikimedia Foundation]] was created from Wikipedia and Nupedia on [[June 20]], [[2003]].<ref>[[Jimmy Wales]]: "[http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2003-June/010743.html Announcing Wikimedia Foundation]", [[June 20]], [[2003]], <Wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org></ref> It applied to the [[United States Patent and Trademark Office]] to [[trademark]] ''Wikipedia'' on [[September 17]], [[2004]]. The mark was granted registration status on [[January 10]], [[2006]]. Trademark protection was accorded by [[Japan]] on [[December 16]], [[2004]], and in the [[European Union]] on [[January 20]], [[2005]]. Technically a [[service mark]], the scope of the mark is for: "Provision of [[information]] in the field of general encyclopedic knowledge via the [[Internet]]"{{Fact|date=June 2008}}. There are plans to license the use of the Wikipedia trademark for some products, such as books or DVDs.<ref>{{cite news |first=Vipin |last=Nair|title=Growing on volunteer power |date=[[December 5]], [[2005]] |publisher=Business Line |url=http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/ew/2005/12/05/stories/2005120500070100.htm}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
== Nature of Wikipedia ==
 
−
===Editing model===
 
−
Unlike traditional encyclopedias such as ''[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]'', no article in Wikipedia undergoes formal peer-review process and changes to articles are made available immediately. No article is owned by its creator or any other editor, or is vetted by any recognized authority. Except for few vandalism-prone pages that can be edited only by administrators, every article may be edited anonymously or with a user account, while only registered users may create a new article. Consequently, Wikipedia "makes no guarantee of validity" of its content.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:General_disclaimer |title=Wikipedia:General disclaimer |accessdate=2008-04-22 |publisher=English Wikipedia}}</ref> Wikipedia also does not censor itself, and it contains materials that some people may find objectionable, offensive or pornographic.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_censored |title=Wikipedia is not censored |publisher=Wikipedia |accessdate=2008-04-30}}</ref> For instance, in 2008, Wikipedia rejected an online petition against the inclusion of [[Depictions of Muhammad#Wikipedia_article|Muhammad's depictions]] in its [[English Wikipedia|English edition]], citing this policy. The presence of politically sensitive materials in Wikipedia had also led [[People's Republic of China|China]] to [[Blocking of Wikipedia in mainland China|block]] the access to parts of the site.<ref>{{citeweb|url=http://in.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idINIndia-32865420080405|title=China allows access to English Wikipedia|publisher=[[Reuters]]|author=Taylor, Sophie|date=2008-04-05|accessdate=2008-07-29}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
Content in Wikipedia, however, is subject to the laws (in particular [[copyright law]]) in [[Florida, United States]], where Wikipedia servers are hosted, and several editorial policies and guidelines that are intended to reinforce the notion that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Each entry in Wikipedia must be about a topic that is encyclopedic and thus is worthy of inclusion. A topic is deemed encyclopedic if it is "notable"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability |title=Wikipedia:Notability |accessdate=2008-02-13 |quote=A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.}}</ref> in the Wikipedia jargon; i.e., if it has received significant coverage in secondary reliable sources (i.e., mainstream media or major academic journals) that are independent of the subject of the topic. Second, Wikipedia must expose knowledge that is already established and recognized.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research |title=Wikipedia:No original research |accessdate=2008-02-13 |quote=Wikipedia does not publish original thought}}</ref> In other words, it must not present, for instance, new information or original works. A claim that is likely to be challenged requires a reference to reliable sources.<ref>Coincidentally, the Wikipedia community regards Wikipedia as a unreliable source.</ref> Within the Wikipedia community, this is often phrased as "verifiability, not truth" to express the idea that the readers are left themselves to check the truthfulness of what appears in the articles and to make their own interpretations.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability |title= Wikipedia:Verifiability |accessdate=2008-02-13 |quote=Material challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, must be attributed to a reliable, published source.}}</ref> Finally, Wikipedia does not take a side.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view |title= Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view |accessdate=2008-02-13 |quote=All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing significant views fairly, proportionately and without bias.}}</ref> All opinions and viewpoints, if attributable to external sources, must enjoy appropriate share of coverage within an article.<ref>{{cite web
 
−
|url=http://www.alternet.org/story/61365/?page=entire
 
−
|title=Will Unethical Editing Destroy Wikipedia's Credibility?
 
−
|author=Eric Haas
 
−
|publisher=AlterNet.org
 
−
|date=[[2007-10-26]]}}</ref> Wikipedia editors, as a community, write and revise those policies and guidelines<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index.php/id;1866322157;fp;2;fpid;2 |title=Who's behind Wikipedia? |publisher=PC World |date=2008-02-06 |accessdate=2008-02-07}}</ref> and enforce them by deleting and modifying article materials failing to meet them, though there exists no mechanism to guarantee the adherence. (See also [[Deletionism and inclusionism in Wikipedia|Deletionism and inclusionism]]<ref>{{cite news |title=The battle for Wikipedia's soul |url=http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10789354 |publisher=[[The Economist]] |date=2008-03-06 |accessdate=2008-03-07 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2007/10/11/dlwiki11.xml |title=Wikipedia: an online encyclopedia torn apart |date=2007-11-10 |accessdate=2008-03-11 |publisher=[[The Daily Telegraph]]}}</ref>)
 
−
 
 
−
[[Image:History comparison example.png|thumb|Editors keep track of changes to articles by checking the difference between two revisions of a page, displayed here in red.]]
 
−
Contributors, registered or not, can take advantage of features available in the software that empowers Wikipedia. The "History" page attached to each article contains every single past revision of the article, though a revision with libelous content, criminal threats or copyright infringements may be removed afterwards.<ref name="Torsten_Kleinz"/><ref>The [[Japanese Wikipedia]], for example, is known for deleting every mention of real names of victims of certain high-profile crimes, even though they may still be noted in other language editions.</ref> The feature makes it easy to compare old and new versions, undo changes that an editor consider undesirable, or restore lost content. The "Discussion" pages associated with each article are used to coordinate work among multiple editors.<ref>{{cite journal |url=http://www.research.ibm.com/visual/papers/wikipedia_coordination_final.pdf
 
−
|author=Fernanda B. Viégas, Martin Wattenberg, Jesse Kriss, Frank van Ham
 
−
|title=Talk Before You Type: Coordination in Wikipedia
 
−
|publisher=Visual Communication Lab, IBM Research
 
−
|date=2007-01-03|accessdate=2008-06-27}}</ref> A regular contributor often maintain a "watchlist" of articles of interest to him, so that he can easily keep tabs on all recent changes to those articles. Computer programs called [[bots]] have been used widely to remove vandalism as soon as it was made,<ref name="CreatingDestroyingAndRestoringValue" /> or start articles such as geography entries in a standard format from statistical data.<!-- In a time of content dispute, a page sometimes get locked for further edit until editors can work out differences.-->
 
−
 
 
−
The open nature of the editing model has been central to any form of criticism on Wikipedia. For example, at any point, a reader of an article cannot be certain, without consulting its "history" page, whether or not the article she is reading has been vandalized.<!-- An encyclopedia Britannica editor once described this by saying that Wikipedia is like a public toilet; you don't know who has used it before you are going to use it.{{fact}}--> Critics argue that non-expert editing undermines quality. Because contributors usually submit edits, rewriting small portions of an entry rather than making full-length revisions, high- and low-quality content may be intermingled within an entry. Historian [[Roy Rosenzweig]] noted: "Overall, writing is the [[Achilles' heel]] of Wikipedia. Committees rarely write well, and Wikipedia entries often have a choppy quality that results from the stringing together of sentences or paragraphs written by different people."<ref>{{cite web
 
−
|url=http://chnm.gmu.edu/resources/essays/d/42
 
−
|title=Can History be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past
 
−
|publisher=The Journal of American History Volume 93, Number 1 (June, 2006): 117-46
 
−
|author=Rosenzweig, Roy
 
−
|accessdate=2007-10-29
 
−
}}</ref> All of these led to the question of the reliability of Wikipedia as a source of accurate information.
 
−
 
 
−
=== Reliability and bias ===
 
−
{{main|Reliability of Wikipedia}}
 
−
{{seealso|Criticism of Wikipedia}}
 
−
 
 
−
Wikipedia has been accused of exhibiting [[systemic bias]] and inconsistency;<ref name="Who">Simon Waldman, [http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2004/oct/26/g2.onlinesupplement Who knows?] ''The Guardian'', [[October 26]], [[2004]]</ref> critics argue that Wikipedia's open nature and a lack of proper sources for much of the information makes it unreliable.<ref>{{ cite news | author = Stacy Schiff | date = [[2006-07-31]] | title = Know It All | work = The New Yorker }}</ref> Some commentators suggest that Wikipedia is generally reliable, but that the reliability of any given article is not always clear.<ref name="AcademiaAndWikipedia" /> Editors of traditional [[reference work]]s such as the ''[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]'' have questioned the project's utility and status as an encyclopedia.<ref name="McHenry_2004">[[Robert McHenry]], "[http://www.techcentralstation.com/111504A.html The Faith-Based Encyclopedia]", [[Tech Central Station]], [[November 15]], [[2004]].</ref> Many [[university]] [[lecturer]]s discourage students from citing any encyclopedia in [[Academia|academic work]], preferring [[primary source]]s;<ref name="WideWorldOfWikipedia">{{ cite web | title = Wide World of WIKIPEDIA | publisher = The Emory Wheel | url = http://www.emorywheel.com/detail.php?n=17902 | date = [[April 21]], [[2006]] | accessdate = 2007-10-17 }}</ref> some specifically prohibit Wikipedia citations.<ref>{{cite news |first=Scott |last=Jaschik |title=A Stand Against Wikipedia |url=http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki |publisher=Inside Higher Ed |date=[[2007-01-26]] |accessdate=2007-01-27 }}</ref> Co-founder [[Jimmy Wales]] stresses that encyclopedias of any type are not usually appropriate as primary sources, and should not be relied upon as authoritative.<ref name="AWorkInProgress">{{cite news |first=Burt |last=Helm |title= Wikipedia: "A Work in Progress" |url= http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/dec2005/tc20051214_441708.htm |publisher=[[BusinessWeek]] |date=[[2005-12-14]] |accessdate=2007-01-29 }}</ref> Technology writer [[Bill Thompson (technology writer)|Bill Thompson]] commented that the debate was possibly "symptomatic of much learning about information which is happening in society today."<ref>{{cite news |title=What is it with Wikipedia? |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4534712.stm |date=[[2005-12-16]] |publisher=[[British Broadcasting Company|BBC]] |first=Bill |last=Thompson}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
[[Image:John Seigenthaler Sr. speaking.jpg|right|thumb|John Seigenthaler Sr. has described Wikipedia as "a flawed and irresponsible research tool."<ref name=Seigenthaler />]]
 
−
Concerns have also been raised regarding the lack of [[accountability]] that results from users' anonymity,<ref name="WikipediaWatch">[[Public Information Research]] – Wikipedia Watch. Retrieved on [[2007-01-28]].</ref> and that it is vulnerable to [[vandalism]], the insertion of spurious information and similar problems. In one particularly well-publicized [[Seigenthaler incident|incident]], false information was introduced into the biography of American political figure [[John Seigenthaler, Sr.]] and remained undetected for four months.<ref name=Seigenthaler>{{cite news
 
−
|url=http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-11-29-wikipedia-edit_x.htm
 
−
|last=Seigenthaler
 
−
|first=John
 
−
|title=A False Wikipedia 'biography'
 
−
|date=2005-11-29
 
−
|publisher=USA Today
 
−
}}</ref> Some critics claim that Wikipedia's open structure makes it an easy target for Internet [[troll (Internet)|trolls]], [[Spam (electronic)|advertisers]], and those with an agenda to push.<ref>{{cite web
 
−
|title=Toward a New Compendium of Knowledge (longer version)
 
−
|url=http://www.citizendium.org/essay.html
 
−
|work=Citizendium.org
 
−
|accessdate=2006-10-10
 
−
}}</ref><ref name="Torsten_Kleinz">{{cite news
 
−
|first=Torsten
 
−
|last=Kleinz
 
−
|title=World of Knowledge
 
−
|work =The Wikipedia Project
 
−
|url=http://w3.linux-magazine.com/issue/51/Wikipedia_Encyclopedia.pdf
 
−
|publisher=[[Linux Magazine]]
 
−
|date=February, 2005
 
−
|accessdate=2007-07-13
 
−
|quote= The Wikipedia's open structure makes it a target for trolls and vandals who malevolently add incorrect information to articles, get other people tied up in endless discussions, and generally do everything to draw attention to themselves.
 
−
}}</ref> The addition of political [[Spin (public relations)|spin]] to articles by organizations including the [[United States House of Representatives|U.S. House of Representatives]] and special interest groups<ref name="DeathByWikipedia">{{cite web
 
−
|title=Death by Wikipedia: The Kenneth Lay Chronicles
 
−
|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/08/AR2006070800135.html
 
−
|accessdate=2006-11-01
 
−
|first=Frank
 
−
|last=Ahrens
 
−
|publisher=The Washington Post
 
−
|date=[[2006-07-09]]
 
−
}}</ref> has been noted,<ref>{{cite web
 
−
|url=http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-6032713-7.html
 
−
|title=Politicians notice Wikipedia
 
−
|publisher=[[CNET Networks|CNET]]
 
−
|author=Kane, Margaret
 
−
|date=[[2006-01-30]]
 
−
|accessdate=2007-01-28
 
−
}}</ref> and organizations such as [[Microsoft]] have offered financial incentives to work on certain articles.<ref>{{cite web
 
−
|url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16775981/
 
−
|title=Microsoft offers cash for Wikipedia edit
 
−
|publisher=[[MSNBC]]
 
−
|author=Bergstein, Brian
 
−
|date=[[2007-01-23]]
 
−
|accessdate=2007-02-01
 
−
}}</ref> These issues have been parodied, notably by [[Stephen Colbert]] in ''[[The Colbert Report]]''.<ref name="wikiality">{{cite news
 
−
|title=Wikiality
 
−
|publisher=Comedycentral.com
 
−
|url=http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=72347
 
−
|author=Stephen Colbert
 
−
|date=[[2006-07-30]]
 
−
}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
Economist [[Tyler Cowen]] writes, "If I had to guess whether Wikipedia or the median refereed journal article on economics was more likely to be true, after a not so long think I would opt for Wikipedia."  He comments that many traditional sources of non-fiction suffer from systemic biases.  Novel results are over-reported in journal articles, and relevant information is omitted from news reports.  But he also cautions that errors are frequently found in Internet sites, and that academics and experts must be vigilant in correcting them.<ref>{{cite web
 
−
|url=http://www.tnr.com/story.html?id=82eb5d70-13bd-4086-9ec0-cb0e9e8411b3
 
−
|title=Cooked Books
 
−
|author=Tyler Cowen
 
−
|publisher=The New Republic
 
−
|date=[[2008-03-14]]}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
In February 2007, an article in ''[[The Harvard Crimson]]'' newspaper reported that some of the professors at [[Harvard University]] include Wikipedia in their [[syllabus]], but that there is a split in their perception of using Wikipedia.<ref>Child, Maxwell L.,[http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=517305 "Professors Split on Wiki Debate"], The Harvard Crimson, Monday, [[February 26]], [[2007]].</ref> In June 2007, former president of the [[American Library Association]] [[Michael Gorman (librarian)|Michael Gorman]] condemned Wikipedia, along with [[Google]],<ref name=stothart>Chloe Stothart, [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=209408 Web threatens learning ethos],
 
−
''The Times Higher Education Supplement'', 2007, '''1799''' (22 June), page 2</ref> stating that academics who endorse the use of Wikipedia are "the intellectual equivalent of a [[dietitian]] who recommends a steady diet of [[Big Mac]]s with everything." He also said that "a generation of intellectual sluggards incapable of moving beyond the Internet” was being produced at universities. He complains that the web-based sources are discouraging students from learning from the more rare texts which either are found only on paper or are on subscription-only web sites. In the same article Jenny Fry (a research fellow at the [[Oxford Internet Institute]]) commented on the academics who cite Wikipedia that: “You cannot say children are intellectually lazy because they are using the Internet when academics are using search engines in their research," she said. "The difference is that they have more experience of being critical about what is retrieved and whether it is authoritative. Children need to be told how to use the Internet in a critical and appropriate way."<ref name=stothart />
 
−
<!--
 
−
Speaking at a conference in Pennsylvania, Wales said he receives about ten e-mails weekly from students saying they got failing grades on papers because they cited Wikipedia. According to ''[[The Sunday Times]]'' of London, Wales told the students they got what they deserved. "For God's sake, you're in college; don't cite the encyclopedia," he said.<ref>"Jimmy Wales," ''Biography Resource Center Online''. (Gale, 2006)</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
So what? First we need some paragraph discussing the reliance of Wikipedia in school. -- Taku
 
−
-->
 
−
 
 
−
There have been efforts within the Wikipedia community to improve the reliability of Wikipedia. The English-language Wikipedia has introduced an assessment scale against which the quality of articles is judged;<ref>{{cite web
 
−
|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment
 
−
|title=Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment
 
−
|accessdate=2007-10-28}}</ref> other editions have also adopted this. Roughly 100 articles in English have passed a rigorous set of criteria to reach the highest rank, "featured article" status; such articles are intended to provide thorough, well-written coverage of their topic, supported by many references to peer-reviewed publications.<ref>{{cite journal
 
−
|url=http://www.research.ibm.com/visual/papers/hidden_order_wikipedia.pdf
 
−
|author=Fernanda B. Viégas, Martin Wattenberg, and Matthew M. McKeon
 
−
|title=The Hidden Order of Wikipedia
 
−
|publisher=Visual Communication Lab, IBM Research
 
−
|date=2007-07-22
 
−
|accessdate=2007-10-30
 
−
|format=pdf}}</ref> In order to improve reliability, some editors have called for "stable versions" of articles, or articles that have been reviewed by the community and locked from further editing – but the community has been unable to form a consensus in favor of such changes, partly because they would require a major software overhaul.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reviewed_article_version|title=meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reviewed_article_version<!--INSERT TITLE-->}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Stable_versions|title=en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Stable_versions<!--INSERT TITLE-->}}</ref> However a similar system is being tested on the German Wikipedia, and there is an expectation that some form of that system will make its way onto the English version at some future time.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Flagged_revisions|title=en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Flagged_revisions<!--INSERT TITLE-->}}</ref> Software created by Luca de Alfaro and colleagues at the [[University of California, Santa Cruz]] is now being tested that will assign "trust ratings" to individual Wikipedia contributors, with the intention that eventually only edits made by those who have established themselves as "trusted editors" will be made immediately visible.<ref>{{cite news
 
−
|url=http://technology.newscientist.com/article/mg19526226.200-wikipedia-20-%C3%A2-now-with-added-trust.html
 
−
|last=Giles
 
−
|first=Jim
 
−
|title=Wikipedia 2.0 - now with added trust
 
−
|date=2007-09-20
 
−
|publisher=NewScientist.com news service
 
−
}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
===Wikipedia community===
 
−
[[Image:WIkimania-2006 010.jpg|left|thumb|[[Wikimania]], an annual conference for users of Wikipedia and other projects operated by the Wikimedia Foundation.]]
 
−
The community has a power structure.<ref name="iTWireJune18-2006">
 
−
{{cite news
 
−
|first=Stuart
 
−
|last=Corner
 
−
|title=What's all the fuss about Wikipedia?
 
−
|url=http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/4666/127/
 
−
|publisher=[[iT Wire]]
 
−
|date=[[June 18]], [[2006]]
 
−
|accessdate=2007-03-25}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.slate.com/id/2184487 |title=The Wisdom of the Chaperones |date=2008-02-22 |accessdate=2008-03-04 |first=Chris |last=Wilson |publisher=Slate}}</ref>
 
−
Wikipedia's community has also been described as "[[cult]]-like,"<ref>{{cite news
 
−
|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2005/dec/15/wikipedia.web20
 
−
|title=Log on and join in, but beware the web cults
 
−
|first=Charles |last=Arthur
 
−
|date=[[2005-12-15]]
 
−
|publisher= ''[[The Guardian]]''
 
−
}}</ref> although not always with entirely negative connotations,<ref>{{cite news
 
−
|url=http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/08/03/wikipedia/index.html
 
−
|title=Wikipedia: The know-it-all Web site
 
−
|date=[[2003-08-04]]
 
−
|first=Kristie
 
−
|last=Lu Stout|publisher=[[CNN]]
 
−
}}</ref> and criticized for failing to accommodate inexperienced users.<ref>"{{cite web
 
−
|url=http://wikinfo.org/index.php/Critical_views_of_Wikipedia
 
−
|title=Critical views of Wikipedia
 
−
|author=Wikinfo
 
−
|date=[[2005-03-30]]
 
−
|accessdate=2007-01-29
 
−
}}</ref><!--While they are welcomed by the community,<ref name="TheNewYorker">
 
−
{{cite news
 
−
|first=Stacy
 
−
|last=Schiff
 
−
|title=Can Wikipedia conquer expertise?
 
−
|work =Know It All
 
−
|url=http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/07/31/060731fa_fact
 
−
|publisher =[[The New Yorker]]
 
−
|date =[[July 24]], [[2006]]
 
−
|accessdate=2007-03-25}}</ref> authors new to Wikipedia are encouraged to read policies to help them learn the ways of Wikipedia.<ref name="Torsten_Kleinz">{{cite news
 
−
|first=Torsten
 
−
|last=Kleinz
 
−
|title=World of Knowledge
 
−
|work =The Wikipedia Project
 
−
|url=http://w3.linux-magazine.com/issue/51/Wikipedia_Encyclopedia.pdf
 
−
|publisher=[[Linux Magazine]]
 
−
|date=February, 2005
 
−
|accessdate=2007-03-25}}</ref>--> Editors in good standing in the community can run for one of many of levels of volunteer stewardship; this begins with "[[sysop|administrator]]"<ref name="David_Mehegan">{{cite news
 
−
|first=David
 
−
|last=Mehegan
 
−
|title=Many contributors, common cause
 
−
|url=http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2006/02/13/many_contributors_common_cause/
 
−
|publisher=[[The Boston Globe]]
 
−
|date=[[February 13]], [[2006]]
 
−
|accessdate=2007-03-25}}</ref> and goes up with "steward" and "bureaucrat".<ref> [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:User_access_levels&oldid=100160162 Wikipedia:User access levels]," Wikipedia ([[January 12]], [[2007]])</ref> Administrators, the largest group of privileged users ({{srlink|Special:Statistics|1,575 Wikipedians}} for the English edition on [[July 17]], [[2008]]), have the ability to delete pages, lock articles from being changed in case of vandalism or editorial disputes, and block users from editing. Contrary to the name, the administrators do not enjoy any special privilege in the decision-making and are prohibited from using their powers to settle content dispute. The roles of administrators, often described as "janitorial", are mostly limited to making edits that have project-wise effects and thus are disallowed to ordinal editors in order to minimize disruption, as well as banning users from making disruptive edits such as vandalism.<!--From the beginning, the role of founder Jimmy Wales, within the Wikipedia community, has been unclear, while co-founder Larry Sanger in the early days had served as an editor-in-chief. -->
 
−
 
 
−
As Wikipedia grows with an unconventional model of encyclopedia building, "Who writes Wikipedia?" has become one of the questions frequently asked on the project, often with a reference to other Web 2.0 projects such as [[Digg]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.viktoria.se/altchi/submissions/submission_edchi_1.pdf |title=Power of the Few vs. Wisdom of the Crowd: Wikipedia and the Rise of the Bourgeoisie |first=Aniket |last=Kittur | accessdate =2008-02-23 |format=pdf}}</ref> Jimmy Wales once argued that only "a community ... a dedicated group of a few hundred volunteers" makes a bulk of contributions to Wikipedia and that the project is therefore "much like any traditional organization". This was later disputed by [[Aaron Swartz]], who noted that several articles he sampled had large portion of their content contributed by a user with low edit count.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whowriteswikipedia |title=Raw Thought: Who Writes Wikipedia? |first=Aaron |last=Swartz |accessdate=2008-02-23 |date=2006-09-04}}</ref> A 2007 study by researchers from [[Dartmouth College]] found that anonymous and infrequent contributors to Wikipedia are as reliable a source of knowledge as those contributors who register with the site.<ref>{{cite news
 
−
|url=http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=good-samaritans-are-on-the-money
 
−
|title=Wikipedia "Good Samaritans'' Are on the Money
 
−
|publisher=[[Scientific American]]
 
−
|date=[[2007-10-19]]}}</ref>
 
−
Although some contributors are authorities in their field, Wikipedia requires that even their contributions be supported by published and verifiable sources. The project's preference for [[consensus]] over [[credential]]s has been labeled "anti-elitism".<ref name="SangerElitism">[[Larry Sanger]], [http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/12/30/142458/25 Why Wikipedia Must Jettison Its Anti-Elitism], [[Kuro5hin]], [[December 31]], [[2004]].</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
In August 2007, a website developed by computer science graduate student [[Virgil Griffith]] named [[WikiScanner]] made its public debut. WikiScanner traces the source of millions of changes made to Wikipedia by editors who are not logged in, which reveals that many of these edits come from corporations or sovereign government agencies about articles related to them, their personnel or their work, and were attempts to remove criticism.<ref name="Seeing Corporate Fingerprints">{{cite news
 
−
|url=http://www10.nytimes.com/2007/08/19/technology/19wikipedia.html?_r=5&hp=&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
 
−
|title=Seeing Corporate Fingerprints From the Editing of Wikipedia
 
−
|first=Katie
 
−
|last=Hafner
 
−
|date=[[2007-08-19]]
 
−
|publisher=[[The New York Times]]
 
−
}}</ref><!-- Wales called WikiScanner "a very clever idea," and said that he was considering some changes to Wikipedia to help visitors better understand what information is recorded about them. "When someone clicks on 'edit,' it would be interesting if we could say, 'Hi, thank you for editing. We see you're logged in from ''[[The New York Times]]''. Keep in mind that we know that, and it's public information,'" he said. "That might make them stop and think."<ref name="Seeing Corporate Fingerprints"/>-->
 
−
 
 
−
In a 2003 study of Wikipedia as a community, economics [[Doctor of Philosophy|Ph.D.]] student Andrea Ciffolilli argued that the low [[transaction cost]]s of participating in [[wiki]] software create a catalyst for collaborative development, and that a "creative construction" approach encourages participation.<ref>
 
−
Andrea Ciffolilli, "[http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_12/ciffolilli/index.html Phantom authority, self-selective recruitment and retention of members in virtual communities: The case of Wikipedia]", ''[[First Monday (journal)|First Monday]]'' December 2003.
 
−
</ref>  In his 2008 book, "''The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It''", [[Jonathan Zittrain]] of the [[Oxford Internet Institute]] and Harvard Law School’s [[Berkman Center for Internet & Society]] cites Wikipedia' success as a case study in how open collaboration has fostered innovation on the web.<ref> {{cite book
 
−
  | last = Zittrain
 
−
  | first = Jonathan
 
−
  |title = The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It - Chapter 6: The Lessons of Wikipedia
 
−
  | author-link = Jonathan Zittrain
 
−
  | publisher = Yale University Press
 
−
  | year = 2008
 
−
  | url = http://yupnet.org/zittrain/archives/16
 
−
  | isbn = 978-0300124873}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
==Operation==
 
−
===Wikimedia Foundation and the Wikimedia chapters===
 
−
[[Image:Wikimedia Foundation RGB logo with text.svg|thumb|180px|Wikimedia Foundation logo]]
 
−
Wikipedia is hosted and funded by the [[Wikimedia Foundation]], a non-profit organization which also operates Wikipedia-related projects such as [[Wikibooks]]. The Wikimedia chapters, local associations of Wikipedians, also participate in the promotion, the development and the funding of the project.
 
−
 
 
−
===Software and hardware===
 
−
The operation of Wikipedia depends on [[MediaWiki]], a custom-made, [[free software|free]] and [[open source software|open source]] [[wiki software]] platform written in [[PHP]] and built upon the [[MySQL]] database.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nedworks.org/~mark/presentations/san/Wikimedia%20architecture.pdf |title=Wikimedia Architecture |author=Mark Bergman |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation Inc. |accessdate=2008-06-27}}</ref> The software incorporates programming features such as a [[Macro (computer science)|macro language]], [[variable]]s, a [[transclusion]] system for [[Web template#Sub-template|templates]], and [[URL redirection]]. MediaWiki is licensed under the [[GNU General Public License]] and used by all Wikimedia projects, as well as many other wiki projects. Originally, Wikipedia ran on [[UseModWiki]] written in [[Perl]] by Clifford Adams (Phase I), which initially required [[CamelCase]] for article hyperlinks; the present double bracket style was incorporated later. Starting in January 2002 (Phase II), Wikipedia began running on a [[PhpWiki|PHP wiki]] engine with a MySQL database; this software was custom-made for Wikipedia by Magnus Manske. The Phase II software was repeatedly modified to accommodate the [[Exponential growth|exponentially increasing]] demand. In July 2002 (Phase III), Wikipedia shifted to the third-generation software, MediaWiki, originally written by Lee Daniel Crocker.
 
−
 
 
−
[[Image:Wikimedia-servers-2006-05-09.svg|thumb|right|Overview of system architecture, May 2006. See [[:meta:Server layout diagrams|server layout diagrams on Meta-Wiki]].]]
 
−
 
 
−
Wikipedia currently runs on dedicated [[computer cluster|clusters]] of [[Linux|GNU/Linux]] servers, 300 in [[Florida]], 26 in [[Amsterdam]], and 23 in Yahoo!'s Korean hosting facility in [[Seoul]].<ref name="servers">{{cite web|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_servers|title=Wikimedia servers at wikimedia.org|accessdate=2008-02-16}}</ref> Wikipedia employed a single server until 2004, when the server setup was expanded into a distributed [[multitier architecture]]. In January 2005, the project ran on 39 [[Dedicated hosting service|dedicated servers]] located in Florida. This configuration included a single master [[database server]] running [[MySQL]], multiple slave database servers, 21 [[web server]]s running the [[Apache HTTP Server]], and seven [[Squid (software)|Squid cache]] servers.
 
−
 
 
−
Wikipedia receives between 20,000 and 45,000 page requests per second, depending on time of day.<ref>"[http://toolserver.org/~leon/stats/reqstats/reqstats-monthly.png Monthly request statistics]", Wikimedia. Retrieved on [[2008-02-26]].</ref> Page requests are first passed to a front-end layer of [[Squid (software)|Squid caching]] servers.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://dammit.lt/uc/workbook2007.pdf |title=Wikipedia: Site internals, configuration, code examples and management issues |author=Domas Mituzas |publisher=MySQL Users Conference 2007 |accessdate=2008-06-27}}</ref> Requests that cannot be served from the Squid cache are sent to load-balancing servers running the [[Linux Virtual Server]] software, which in turn pass the request to one of the Apache web servers for page rendering from the database. The web servers deliver pages as requested, performing page rendering for all the language editions of Wikipedia. To increase speed further, rendered pages for anonymous users are cached in a distributed memory cache until invalidated, allowing page rendering to be skipped entirely for most common page accesses. Two larger clusters in the Netherlands and Korea now handle much of Wikipedia's traffic load.
 
−
 
 
−
==License and language editions==
 
−
{{see also|List of Wikipedias}}
 
−
All text in Wikipedia is covered by [[GNU Free Documentation License]] (GFDL), a [[copyleft]] license permitting the redistribution, creation of derivative works, and commercial use of content while authors retain copyright of their work.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyrights |title=Wikipedia:Copyrights |accessdate=2008-04-22 |publisher=English Wikipedia}}</ref> The position that Wikipedia is merely a hosting service has been successfully used as a defense in court.<ref>{{cite news
 
−
|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/02/AR2007110201339_Inform.html
 
−
|title=Wikipedia cleared in French defamation case
 
−
|publisher=Reuters
 
−
|date=2007-11-02
 
−
|accessdate=2007-11-02}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080502-dumb-idea-suing-wikipedia-for-calling-you-dumb.html |title=Dumb idea: suing Wikipedia for calling you "dumb" |first=Nate |last=Anderson |date=2008-05-02 |accessdate=2008-05-04 |publisher=
 
−
[[Ars Technica]]}}</ref> Wikipedia has been working on the switch to [[Creative Commons licenses]] because the GFDL, initially designed for software manuals, is not suitable for online reference works and because the two licenses are currently incompatible.<ref>{{cite web
 
−
|url=http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:License_update
 
−
|title=Resolution:License update
 
−
|date=2007
 
−
|accessdate=2007-12-04
 
−
|author=Walter Vermeir
 
−
|publisher=Wikizine}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
[[Image:English Wikipedia contributors by country.svg|thumb|Contributors for English Wikipedia by country as of September 2006<ref>{{cite web
 
−
|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Edits_by_project_and_country_of_origin
 
−
|title=Edits by project and country of origin
 
−
|date=2006-09-04
 
−
|accessdate=2007-10-25
 
−
}}</ref>.]]
 
−
The handling of media files (e.g., image files) varies across language editions. Some language editions, such as the English Wikipedia, include non-free image files under [[fair use]] doctrine, while the others have opted not to. This is in part because of the difference in copyright laws between countries; for example, the notion of fair use does not exist in [[Japanese copyright law]]. Media files covered by [[free content]] licenses (e.g., Creative Commons' cc-by-sa) are shared across language editions via [[Wikimedia Commons]] repository, a project operated by the Wikimedia Foundation.
 
−
 
 
−
There are currently 262 language editions of Wikipedia; of these, 22 have over 100,000 articles and 79 have over 1,000 articles.<ref name="ListOfWikipedias" /> (See [[List of Wikipedias]] for the full list.) According to Alexa, the English [[subdomain]] (en.wikipedia.org; [[English Wikipedia]]) receives approximately 52% of Wikipedia's cumulative traffic, with the remaining split among the other languages (Spanish: 19%, French: 5%, Polish: 3%, German: 3%, Japanese: 3%,  Portuguese: 2%).<ref name="AlexaStats" /> As of July 2008, the five largest language editions are (in order of article count) [[English Wikipedia|English]], [[German Wikipedia|German]], [[French Wikipedia|French]], [[Polish Wikipedia|Polish]] and [[Japanese Wikipedia]]s.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Multilingual_statistics |title=Wikipedia:Multilingual statistics |publisher=English Wikipedia |accessdate=2007-12-23}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
Since Wikipedia is web-based and therefore worldwide, contributors of a same language edition may use different dialects or may come from different countries (as is the case for the [[English Wikipedia|English edition]]). These differences may lead to some conflicts over [[American and British English spelling differences|spelling differences]], (e.g. ''color'' vs. ''colour'')<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Spelling|title= spelling | work = Manual of Style | publisher = Wikipedia |accessdate=2007-05-19}}</ref> or points of view.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias|title=Countering systemic bias|accessdate=2007-05-19}}</ref>
 
−
Though the various language editions are held to global policies such as "neutral point of view," they diverge on some points of policy and practice, most notably on whether images that are not [[Free Content|licensed freely]] may be used under a claim of [[fair use]].<ref>{{cite web
 
−
|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
 
−
|title=Fair use
 
−
|publisher=Meta wiki
 
−
|accessdate=2007-07-14}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
 
−
|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Images_on_Wikipedia
 
−
|title=Images on Wikipedia
 
−
|accessdate=2007-07-14}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal
 
−
|url=http://www.research.ibm.com/visual/papers/viegas_hicss_visual_wikipedia.pdf
 
−
|author=Fernanda B. Viégas
 
−
|title=The Visual Side of Wikipedia
 
−
|publisher=Visual Communication Lab, IBM Research
 
−
|date=2007-01-03
 
−
|accessdate=2007-10-30}}</ref>
 
−
[[Image:PercentWikipediasGraph.png|thumb|Percentage of all Wikipedia articles in English (red) and top ten largest language editions (blue). As of July 2008, less than 23% of Wikipedia articles are in English.]] Jimmy Wales has described Wikipedia as "an effort to create and distribute a free encyclopedia of the highest possible quality to every single person on the planet in their own language".<ref>[[Jimmy Wales]], "[http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2005-March/020469.html Wikipedia is an encyclopedia]", March 8 2005, <Wikipedia-l@wikimedia.org></ref> Though each language edition functions more or less independently, some efforts are made to supervise them all. They are coordinated in part by [[Wikipedia:Meta|Meta-Wiki]], the Wikimedia Foundation's wiki devoted to maintaining all of its projects (Wikipedia and others). For instance, Meta-Wiki provides [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Statistics important statistics] on all language editions of Wikipedia and maintain a [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_articles_every_Wikipedia_should_have list of articles every Wikipedia should have]. The list concerns basic content by subject: biography, history, geography, society, culture, science, technology, foodstuffs, and mathematics. As for the rest, it is not rare for articles strongly related to a particular language not to have counterparts in another edition. For example, articles about small towns in the United States might only be available in English.
 
−
 
 
−
Translated articles represent only a small portion of articles in most editions,<ref>For example, "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Translation_into_English Translation into English]", Wikipedia. ([[March 9]], [[2005]])</ref> in part because automated translation of articles is disallowed.<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Translations Wikipedia: Translation]. English Wikipedia, accessed on [[2007-02-03]]</ref> Articles available in more than one language may offer "[[InterWiki]]" links, which link to the counterpart articles in other editions.
 
−
 
 
−
Several language versions have published a selection of Wikipedia articles on an optical disk version. An English version, [[2006 Wikipedia CD Selection]], contained about 2000 articles. Another English version <ref>"[http://www.wikipediaondvd.com/site.php?temp=down List of Mirrors Hosting the CD Iso.]" ''Wikipedia on DVD''. [[History of Wikipedia|Linterweb]]. Accessed [[1 June]] [[2007]]</ref> developed by [[History of Wikipedia|Linterweb]] contains "1988 + articles".<ref>"[http://www.wikipediaondvd.com/ Wikipedia on DVD]". Linterweb. Accessed [[1 June]] [[2007]]. "Linterweb is authorized to make a commercial use of the Wikipedia trademark restricted to the selling of the Encyclopedia CDs and DVDs."</ref><ref>"[http://www.wikipediaondvd.com/site.php?temp=buy Wikipedia 0.5 Available on a CD-ROM]". ''Wikipedia on DVD''. Linterweb. Accessed [[1 June]] [[2007]]. "The DVD or CD-ROM version 0.5 was commercially available for purchase."</ref> The Polish version contains nearly 240000 articles.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Polska_Wikipedia_na_DVD_%28z_Helionem%29/en |title=Polish Wikipedia on DVD}}</ref> There are also a few German versions.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia-Distribution |title=Wikipedia:DVD}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
==Cultural significance==
 
−
{{main|Wikipedia in culture‎}}
 
−
[[Image:Webcomic xkcd - Wikipedian protester.png|thumb|An [[xkcd]] strip entitled "Wikipedian Protester."]]
 
−
In addition to [[Logistic function|logistic growth]] in the number of its articles,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Modelling_Wikipedia%27s_growth |title=Wikipedia:Modelling Wikipedia's growth |accessdate=2007-12-22}}</ref> Wikipedia has steadily gained status as a general reference website since its inception in 2001.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=849 |title=694 Million People Currently Use the Internet Worldwide According To comScore Networks |date-2006-05-04 |accessdate=2007-12-16 |publisher=comScore |quote=Wikipedia has emerged as a site that continues to increase in popularity, both globally and in the U.S. }}</ref> According to [[Alexa Internet|Alexa]] and [[comScore]], Wikipedia is among the ten most visited websites world-wide.<ref name=AlexaTop500>{{cite web |url=http://www.alexa.com/site/ds/top_sites?ts_mode=global&lang=none |title=Top 500 |accessdate=2007-12-04 |publisher=[[Alexa Internet|Alexa]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.comscore.com/press/data.asp |title=comScore Data Center |date=October 2007 |accessdate=2008-01-19}}</ref> Of the top ten, Wikipedia is the only non-profit website. The growth of Wikipedia has been fueled by its dominant position in Google search results;<ref>{{cite journal |url=http://www.hoover.org/publications/ednext/16111162.html |title=Wikipedia or Wickedpedia? |journal=Hoover Institution |first=Michael J |last= Petrilli |volume=8 |issue=2 |accessdate=2008-03-21}}</ref> about 50% of search engine traffic to Wikipedia comes from Google,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://weblogs.hitwise.com/leeann-prescott/2007/02/wikipedia_traffic_sources.html |title=Google Traffic To Wikipedia up 166% Year over Year |publisher=[[Hitwise]] |date=2007-02-16 |accessdate=2007-12-22}}</ref> a good portion of which is related to academic research.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://weblogs.hitwise.com/leeann-prescott/2006/10/wikipedia_and_academic_researc.html |title=Wikipedia and Academic Research |publisher=[[Hitwise]] |date=2006-10-17 |accessdate=2008-02-06}}</ref>  In April 2007 the [[Pew Research Center|Pew]] Internet and American Life project found that one third of US Internet users consulted Wikipedia.<ref>{{cite web |first=Lee |last=Rainie |coauthor=Bill Tancer |title=Wikipedia users |publisher=[[Pew Research Center]] |work=Pew Internet & American Life Project |date=2007-12-15 |url=http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Wikipedia07.pdf |format=PDF |accessdate=2007-12-15 |quote=36% of online American adults consult Wikipedia. It is particularly popular with the well-educated and current college-age students.}}</ref> In October 2006, the site was estimated to have a hypothetical market value of $580 million if it ran ads.<ref>{{cite web
 
−
|url=http://www.watchmojo.com/web/blog/?p=626
 
−
|title=What is Wikipedia.org's Valuation?
 
−
|first=Ashkan
 
−
|last=Karbasfrooshan
 
−
|date=2006-10-26
 
−
|accessdate=2007-12-01}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
Wikipedia's content has also been used in academic studies, books, conferences, and court cases.<ref>"[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_in_the_media Wikipedia:Wikipedia in the media]", Wikipedia</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200216886.pdf|title=Bourgeois ''et al'' v. Peters ''et al.''|format=PDF|accessdate=2007-02-06}}</ref> The [[Parliament of Canada]]'s website refers to Wikipedia's article on [[same-sex marriage]] in the "related links" section of its "further reading" list for the [[Civil Marriage Act]].<ref> [http://www.parl.gc.ca/LEGISINFO/index.asp?Session=13&query=4381&List=ot#2 C-38], LEGISINFO ([[March 28]], [[2005]])</ref> The encyclopedia's assertions are increasingly used as a source by organizations such as the U.S. Federal Courts and the [[World Intellectual Property Organization]]<ref name="WP_court_source">{{cite journal |last=Arias |first=Martha L. |date=[[2007-01-29]] |title=[http://www.ibls.com/internet_law_news_portal_view.aspx?s=latestnews&id=1668 Wikipedia: The Free Online Encyclopedia and its Use as Court Source] |journal=Internet Business Law Services}} (the name "''World Intellectual Property Office''" should however read "''World Intellectual Property Organization''" in this source)</ref> – though mainly for ''supporting information'' rather than information decisive to a case.<ref>{{cite news |last=Cohen |first=Noam |date=[[2007-01-29]] |title=Courts Turn to Wikipedia, but Selectively |url=http://www10.nytimes.com/2007/01/29/technology/29wikipedia.html?_r=5&ref=technology&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin |journal=New York Times}}</ref> Content appearing on Wikipedia has also been cited as a source and referenced in some [[U.S. intelligence community|U.S. intelligence agency]] reports.<ref>{{cite web
 
−
|url=http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2007/03/the_wikipedia_factor_in_us_int.html
 
−
|title=The Wikipedia Factor in U.S. Intelligence
 
−
|first=Steven | last= Aftergood
 
−
|publisher=Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy
 
−
|date=2007-03-21
 
−
|accessdate=2007-04-14}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
Wikipedia has also been used as a source in [[journalism]],<ref>{{cite news |title=Wikipedia in the Newsroom |url=http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4461 |date=[[February 2008|February]]/March 2008 |publisher=[[American Journalism Review]] |first=Donna |last=Shaw |accessdate=2008-02-11}}</ref> sometimes without attribution, and several reporters have been dismissed for plagiarizing from Wikipedia.<ref>Shizuoka newspaper plagiarized Wikipedia article, ''Japan News Review'', [[July 5]], [[2007]]</ref><ref> "[http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA010307.02A.richter.132c153.html Express-News staffer resigns after plagiarism in column is discovered]", ''[[San Antonio Express-News]]'', [[January 9]], [[2007]].</ref><ref>"[http://starbulletin.com/2006/01/13/news/story03.html Inquiry prompts reporter's dismissal]", ''[[Honolulu Star-Bulletin]]'', [[January 13]], [[2007]].</ref>
 
−
In July 2007, Wikipedia was the focus of a 30-minute documentary on [[BBC Radio 4]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/factual/pip/efv21/|title=Radio 4 Documentary}}</ref> which argued that, with increased usage and awareness, the number of references to Wikipedia in popular culture is such that the term is one of a select band of 21st-century nouns that are so familiar ([[Google]], [[Facebook]], [[YouTube]]) that they no longer need explanation and are on a par with such 20th-century terms as [[The Hoover Company|Hoovering]] or [[Coca-Cola|Coke]]. Many parody Wikipedia's openness, with characters vandalizing or modifying the online encyclopedia project's articles. Notably, comedian [[Stephen Colbert]] has parodied or referenced Wikipedia on numerous episodes of his show ''[[The Colbert Report]]'' and coined the related term "[[wikiality]]".<ref name="wikiality" />
 
−
 
 
−
[[Image:Onion wikipedia.jpg|thumb|The Onion newspaper headline "Wikipedia Celebrates 750 Years Of American Independence"]]
 
−
Wikipedia has also created an impact upon forms of media. Some media sources satirize Wikipedia's susceptibility to inserted inaccuracies, such as a front-page article in ''[[The Onion]]'' in July 2006 with the title "Wikipedia Celebrates 750 Years of American Independence",<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.theonion.com/content/node/50902 |title=Wikipedia Celebrates 750 Years Of American Independence |accessmonthday= [[October 15]] |accessyear=2006 |year=2006 |work=[http://www.theonion.com/content/index The Onion]}}</ref> while others may draw upon Wikipedia's statement that anyone can edit, such as "[[The Negotiation]]", an episode of ''[[The Office (U.S. TV series)|The Office]]'', where character [[Michael Scott (The Office)|Michael Scott]] said that "Wikipedia is the best thing ever. Anyone in the world can write anything they want about any subject, so you know you are getting the best possible information", and a select few parody Wikipedia's policies, such as the ''xkcd'' strip named "Wikipedian Protester", that also included the joke "Semi-protect the Constitution!"
 
−
 
 
−
The first documentary film about Wikipedia, entitled ''[[Truth in Numbers: The Wikipedia Story]]'', is scheduled for 2009 release. Shot on several continents, the film will cover the history of Wikipedia and feature interviews with Wikipedia editors around the world.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikidocumentary.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page|title=wikidocumentary.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page<!--INSERT TITLE-->}}</ref><ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/03/11/PKGRJN87UI1.DTL| title=Industry Buzz| last=Hart| first=Hugh| date=[[March 11]], [[2007]]| publisher=[[San Francisco Chronicle|SFGate.com]]}}</ref> Dutch filmmaker [[Tegenlicht|IJsbrand van Veelen]] premiered his 45-minute documentary ''The Truth According to Wikipedia'' in April, 2008.<ref>{{cite web
 
−
|url=http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/04/08/the-truth-according-to-wikipedia/
 
−
|title=The Truth According to Wikipedia
 
−
|last=Schonfeld
 
−
|first=Erick
 
−
|date=[[April 8]], [[2008]]
 
−
|publisher=TechCruch.com}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
<!-- This paragraph doesn't make much sense; what is relevancy? He was merely using Wikipedia (as an example) to make a point. -- TakuyaMurata
 
−
 
 
−
On [[September 28]], [[2007]], Italian politician [[Franco Grillini]] raised a parliamentary question with the Minister of Cultural Resources and Activities about the necessity of [[Panoramafreiheit|freedom of panorama]]. He said that the lack of such freedom forced Wikipedia, "the seventh most consulted website" to forbid all images of modern Italian buildings and art, and claimed this was hugely damaging to tourist revenues.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.grillini.it/show.php?4885|title=Comunicato stampa. On. Franco Grillini. Wikipedia. Interrogazione a Rutelli. Con "diritto di panorama" promuovere arte e architettura contemporanea italiana. Rivedere con urgenza legge copyright|date=[[12 October]] [[2007]]}}</ref>
 
−
-->On [[September 16]], [[2007]], ''[[The Washington Post]]'' reported that Wikipedia had become a focal point in the 2008 election campaign, saying, "Type a candidate's name into Google, and among the first results is a Wikipedia page, making those entries arguably as important as any ad in defining a candidate. Already, the presidential entries are being edited, dissected and debated countless times each day."<ref>{{cite news
 
−
|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/16/AR2007091601699_pf.html
 
−
|title=On Wikipedia, Debating 2008 Hopefuls' Every Facet
 
−
|author=Jose Antonio Vargas
 
−
|publisher=The Washington Post
 
−
|date=2007-09-17}}
 
−
</ref> An October 2007 [[Reuters]] article, entitled "Wikipedia page the latest status symbol", reported the recent phenomenon of how having a Wikipedia article vindicates one's notability.<ref>{{cite news
 
−
|url=http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2232893820071022?sp=true
 
−
|title=Wikipedia page the latest status symbol
 
−
|author=Jennifer Ablan
 
−
|publisher=Reuters
 
−
|date=2007-10-22
 
−
|accessdate=2007-10-24}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
Wikipedia won two major awards in May 2004.<ref>"[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Trophy_box Trophy Box]", [[Wikipedia:Meta|Meta-Wiki]] ([[March 28]], [[2005]]).</ref> The first was a Golden Nica for Digital Communities of the annual [[Prix Ars Electronica]] contest; this came with a €10,000 (£6,588; $12,700) grant and an invitation to present at the PAE Cyberarts Festival in [[Austria]] later that year. The second was a Judges' [[Webby Awards|Webby Award]] for the "community" category.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.webbyawards.com/webbys/winners-2004.php|title=Webby Awards 2004|publisher=The International Academy of Digital Arts and Sciences|date=2004|accessdate=2007-06-19}}</ref> Wikipedia was also nominated for a "Best Practices" Webby. On [[January 26]], [[2007]], Wikipedia was also awarded the fourth highest brand ranking by the readers of brandchannel.com, receiving 15% of the votes in answer to the question "Which brand had the most impact on our lives in 2006?"<ref>{{cite news |first=Anthony |last=Zumpano |title=Similar Search Results: Google Wins |url=http://www.brandchannel.com/features_effect.asp?pf_id=352 |publisher=[[Interbrand]] |date=[[2007-01-29]] |accessdate=2007-01-28 }}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
==Related projects==
 
−
{{sisterlinks}}
 
−
A number of interactive multimedia encyclopedias incorporating entries written by the public existed long before Wikipedia was founded. The first of these was the 1986 [[BBC Domesday Project]], which included text (entered on [[BBC Micro]] computers) and photographs from over 1&nbsp;million contributors in the [[United Kingdom|UK]], and covering the geography, art and culture of the UK. This was the first interactive multimedia encyclopedia (and was also the first major multimedia document connected through internal links), with the majority of articles being accessible through an interactive map of the UK. The user-interface and part of the content of the Domesday Project have now been emulated on a website.<ref name="Domesday Project">[http://www.domesday1986.com/ Web-based emulator of the Domesday Project User Interface] and data from the Community Disc (contributions from the general public) -- most articles can be accessed using the interactive map</ref> One of the most successful early online encyclopedias incorporating entries by the public was [[h2g2]], which was also created by the [[BBC]]. The h2g2 encyclopedia was relatively light-hearted, focusing on articles which were both witty and informative. Both of these projects had similarities with Wikipedia, but neither gave full editorial freedom to public users.
 
−
 
 
−
Wikipedia has also spawned several sister projects. The first, "In Memoriam: September 11<!--Do not reformat this date, it is quoted--> Wiki",<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.sep11memories.org/wiki/In_Memoriam|title=sep11memories.org/<!--INSERT TITLE-->|accessdate=2007-02-06}}</ref> created in October 2002,<ref>[http://www.sep11memories.org/index.php?title=In_Memoriam&oldid=1502 First edit to the wiki] In Memoriam: September 11 wiki ([[October 28]], [[2002]]),</ref> detailed the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]]; this project was closed in October 2006. [[Wiktionary]], a dictionary project, was launched in December 2002;<ref>"[http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_News&diff=prev&oldid=4133 Announcement of Wiktionary's creation]", [[December 12]], [[2002]]. Retrieved on [[2007-02-02]].</ref> [[Wikiquote]], a collection of quotations, a week after Wikimedia launched, and [[Wikibooks]], a collection of collaboratively written free books. Wikimedia has since started a number of other projects, including [[Wikiversity]], a project for the creation of free learning materials and the provision of online learning activities.<ref name="OurProjects">"[http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Our_projects Our projects]", [[Wikimedia Foundation]]. Retrieved on [[2007-01-24]]</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
A similar non-wiki project, the [[GNUPedia]] project, co-existed with Nupedia early in its history; however, it has been retired and its creator, [[free software]] figure [[Richard Stallman]], has lent his support to Wikipedia.<ref name="stallman1999" />
 
−
 
 
−
Other websites centered on collaborative [[knowledge base]] development have drawn inspiration from or inspired Wikipedia. Some, such as [[Susning.nu]], [[Enciclopedia Libre]], and [[WikiZnanie]] likewise employ no formal review process, whereas others use more traditional [[peer review]], such as [[Encyclopedia of Life]], [[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]], [[Scholarpedia]], [[h2g2]] and [[Everything2]].
 
−
 
 
−
Jimmy Wales, the ''de facto'' leader of Wikipedia,<ref name="defactoleader">{{cite news
 
−
|first=Holden
 
−
|last=Frith
 
−
|url=http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article1571519.ece
 
−
|title=Wikipedia founder launches rival online encyclopedia
 
−
|publisher=''[[The Times]]''
 
−
|date=[[March 26]], [[2007]],
 
−
|accessdate=2007-06-27
 
−
|quote=<small>Wikipedia's de facto leader, Jimmy Wales, stood by the site's format.</small>}}<small> – Holden Frith.</small></ref> said in an interview in regard to the online encyclopedia [[Citizendium]] which is overviewed by experts in their respective fields:<ref name=Orlowski18>
 
−
{{cite news
 
−
|first=Andrew
 
−
|last=Orlowski
 
−
|authorlink=Andrew Orlowski
 
−
|url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/18/sanger_forks_wikipedia/
 
−
|title=Wikipedia founder forks Wikipedia, More experts, less fiddling?
 
−
|publisher=''[[The Register]]''
 
−
|date=[[September 18]], [[2006]]
 
−
|accessdate=2007-06-27
 
−
|quote=<small>Larry Sanger describes the Citizendium project as a "progressive or gradual fork", with the major difference that experts have the final say over edits.</small>}}<small> – Andrew Orlowski.</small></ref> "We welcome a diversity of efforts. If Larry's project is able to produce good work, we will benefit from it by copying it back into Wikipedia."<ref name="JayLyman">
 
−
{{cite news
 
−
|first=Jay
 
−
|last=Lyman
 
−
|url=http://www.crmbuyer.com/story/53137.html
 
−
|title=Wikipedia Co-Founder Planning New Expert-Authored Site
 
−
|publisher=LinuxInsider
 
−
|date=[[September 20]], [[2006]]
 
−
|accessdate=2007-06-27}}</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
==See also==
 
−
{{meta|List of Wikipedias}}
 
−
*[[List of online encyclopedias]]
 
−
* [[List of wikis]]
 
−
* [[Open content]]
 
−
* [[USA Congressional staff edits to Wikipedia]]
 
−
* [[User-generated content]]
 
−
* [[Recursion]]
 
−
* {{srlink|Wikipedia:About}}
 
−
* {{srlink|Wikipedia:Press coverage}}
 
−
* [[Wikipedia Watch]]
 
−
* [[Wikitruth]]
 
−
* [[Wikipedia Review]]
 
−
 
 
−
==Further reading==
 
−
===Press coverage===
 
−
*{{cite news |url=http://www.economist.com/science/tq/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11484062 |title=The free-knowledge fundamentalist |date=2008-06-05 |accessdate=2008-06-05 |publisher=The Economist}}
 
−
*{{cite news |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/01/magazine/01WIKIPEDIA-t.html?_r=1&ref=magazine&oref=slogin |title=All the News That's Fit to Print Out |first=Jonathan |last=Dee |publisher=The New York Times Magazine |date=2007-07-01 |accessdate=2008-02-22}}
 
−
*{{cite news |title=Wikipedia 2.0 - now with added trust |url=http://technology.newscientist.com/article/mg19526226.200-wikipedia-20-â-now-with-added-trust.html |date=2007-09-20 |accessdate=2008-02-22 |first=Jim |last=Giles |publisher=New Scientist}}
 
−
*{{cite news |title=Wikipedia Rules |url=http://thephoenix.com/article_ektid52864.aspx |publisher=[[The Phoenix (newspaper)|The Phoenix]] |date=2007-12-02 |accessdate=2008-02-22 |first=Mike |last=Miliard}}
 
−
*{{cite news |url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1066904-1,00.html |title=It's a Wiki, Wiki World |first=Chris |last=Taylor |date=2005-05-29 |publisher=Time |accessdate=2008-02-22}}
 
−
*{{cite news |url=http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200609/wikipedia |title=The Hive |first=Marshall |last=Poe |authorlink=Marshall Poe |date=2006-09 |accessdate=2008-03-22 |publisher=[[The Atlantic Monthly]]}}
 
−
*Balke, Jeff. [http://blogs.chron.com/brokenrecord/2008/03/for_music_fans_wikipedia_myspa.html For Music Fans: Wikipedia > MySpace] ''[[Houston Chronicle]]''
 
−
 
 
−
===Academic studies===
 
−
* {{cite journal|author=Ulrike Pfeil, Panayiotis Zaphiris, and Chee Siang Ang|date=2006|title=Cultural differences in collaborative authoring of Wikipedia|journal=Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication|volume=12|issue=1|url=http://jcmc.indiana.edu./vol12/issue1/pfeil.html}}
 
−
* {{cite web|title=Do as I do: leadership in the Wikipedia|author=Joseph M. Reagle Jr.|url=http://reagle.org./joseph/2005/ethno/leadership.html|work=Wikipedia Drafts|date=2005}}
 
−
* {{cite journal |url=http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue12_4/wilkinson/index.html |title=Assessing the value of cooperation in Wikipedia |date=April 2007 |first=Dennis M. |last=Wilkinson |co-author=Bernardo A. Huberman |journal=First Monday |volume=12 |issue=4 |accessdate=2008-02-22}}
 
−
* {{cite journal |url=http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue12_8/nielsen/index.html |title=Scientific citations in Wikipedia |date=August 2007 |journal=First Monday |volume=12 |issue=8 |accessdate=2008-02-22 |first=Finn Årup |last=Nielsen}}
 
−
 
 
−
===Essays===
 
−
*[[Roy Rosenzweig]]: [http://chnm.gmu.edu/resources/essays/d/42 Can History be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past]. (Originally published in [[The Journal of American History]] Volume 93, Number 1, June 2006, p117-46)
 
−
*[http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21131 The Charms of Wikipedia] [[Nicholson Baker]] article on Wikipedia from ''[[The New York Review of Books]]''
 
−
 
 
−
==References==
 
−
{{reflist|2}}
 
−
 
 
−
==External links==
 
−
{{Spoken Wikipedia|Wikipedia.ogg|2005-06-25}}
 
−
*[http://www.wikipedia.org/ Wikipedia] – multilingual portal (contains links to all language editions of the project)
 
−
*[http://www.dmoz.org/Computers/Open_Source/Open_Content/Encyclopedias/Wikipedia/ Wikipedia] at the [[Open Directory Project]]
 
−
*[http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/tech/wikipedia.html CBC News: I, editor]
 
−
*[http://www.wikihow.com/Contribute-to-Wikipedia Help Edit Wikipedia] A [[wikiHow]] article.
 
−
*[http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/11/01/wikipedia.assignment.ap/index.html Class assignment: Write an original Wikipedia article]
 
−
*[irc://irc.freenode.net/Wikipedia #Wikipedia] on [[freenode]]
 

Latest revision as of 21:00, August 7, 2008

Redirect to:

Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=En.wikipedia&oldid=496919"