eltow3r - All you ever needed on an useless blog

viernes, agosto 05, 2005


The publication of an updated and objective enciclopedia has long been the mission of many organisations and individuals, starting from the first English dictionary written by Samuel Johnson. However, the world panorama changes at a heartbreaking speeds, and so as soon as an article is processed, it is very likely to be obsolete if it deals with contemporary issues.

Wikipedia circumvents this by having a life of its own. The wiki software allows the enciclopedia to be updated in a matter of seconds.

However, this opens the door to anyone updating the enciclopedia, which can also mean that people with biases or simply misinformed people seek to change the enciclopedia. For example, once, the entire 'islam' entry was completely erased and replaced with the single word: turd. Although this was regenerated in a matter of minutes, it simply reveals the easiness to change the fundamental meaning of an article. For example, the 'kosovo' article had to be locked and prevented from being changed because of the huge debate going on (even if the situation seems all too clear to me - but then again, this is why the srticle was locked).

Modern scholars repudiate the Open Enciclopedia as not having the necessary credentials to be worthy of academic standard, and these situations help their arguments, but I still firmly beleive in the advantages of wikipedia over a regular enciclopedia.

What do you think? Maybe you'd like to visit Wikipedia itself.