Wikipedia: Beneath the Surface

[shickashame]

good balanced take on wikipedia, but the expert argument is unnecessary because no original research is allowed anyways. Everyone is pointing back to sources that are then evaluated for their expertise.

[Paddis92]

The problem with "experts" is that they're not always right, which some people seem to think. Most of my teachers point out that the information on Wikipedia usually isn't written by experts and therefore can't be trusted. The problem with this mentality is that even though I may not be an expert, my knowledge is worth just as much as an experts.

[transworId]

Wikipedia is a JOKE. It's the poorest source of information on the internet.

[therealbuba]

@transworId I highly doubt that look at 99% of whats on the internet.

[CrypticC62]

Very interesting and comprehensive video. It seemed to put a (perhaps unnecessary) emphasis on the dynamics of contentious articles. In some articles, especially those in the realm of natural science, maintaining a neutral point of view is extremely easy because so much of the content is based on data and facts rather than conflicting viewpoints.

Also, slight inaccuracy: Anyone can add a content banner, not just admins.

[themagicofcoupons]

I love Wikipedia and use it all the time. So far, I've found the articles very accurate. I was impressed that Wikipedia had an article detailing the history of coupons.

[poopsinger]

i gonna make a wikipedia page

jubi

[cormaggio]

Nicely done video! I've added it to a resource I developed on Wikiversity, called 'Inside Wikipedia' (can't seem to post links here in comments).

[garycalgary]

very balanced....i didn't trust it at first but now that i understand the concept i use it a lot more

[FatherElectric]

Why do they keep saying "quality and accuracy", when they really mean regurgitation of the party line?

[nerosine9]

wikipedia is good but GREEDY stop demanding donations

[Supenmanu]

One problem i have with Wikipedia is that as has allready been said in the video, everyone can edit a wikipedia page and an expert on the subject might easily get kicked out of wikipedia simply because his views are not the same as that of the everyday Joe who are mostly editng Wikipdia. Also what motiviates people to edit Wikipedia is to push their own biased POV - because that is the only reward there is as there is otherwise little motivation for editing.

[Netalarm]

eh. every user can flag pages (including IPs), not just admins. admins don't have special editing powers. actually, it's specifically stated that admins are not allowed to use their admin powers in editing and conflicts.

[stylechecker2009]

Makes sense,

Every damn thing is subject to speculation...

Atleast better than all other shits like " Hard Copy"

Smoking guns

[ronwgilmour]

Very nice! Unusually nuanced and balanced treatment.