10/24/2018

Stephen Harrison article surrounding the rules of Wikipedia in relationship towards a term used during the Kavanaugh hearing is not one that is really that surprising. As someone who goes on Wikipedia a lot for information or just to dive deep into the rabbit hole of clicking on one term then another its easy to see just how strict Wikipedia when it is dealing with the storing of information. Frankly I am perfectly fine with the way to run the storing of information. Wikipedia always has had the process of information go through a variable number of steps to make sure that the information being put into its system as been crossed referenced with multiple people either administrators or others who would have knowledge of the information being put it. By having information being processed this way it allows for the spreading of false information limited among the site so that proper info may be given to the visitors of the site. Also, Wikipedia as the article states clings to the terms that have been used for a longer time such as the given example of the word “tinder”, that the first information relating to the word would be the literal definition and its other definition in relation to the dating app. In this way Wikipedia stays true to what the website states itself to be, an encyclopedia. For example, even if you looked up the word “tinder” in a modern encyclopedia, you will find the literal definition of tinder and not the dating app. Although I fully agree with the majority of how Wikipedia deals with the information I believe they should have modern reference section with some words that people believe should refer to the current population definition, although doing this may be difficult because everyone has a different definition for certain words in modern lingo.



Leave a Reply

CAPTCHA
*