There is no doubt that fans of Wikipedia have much to be welcomed: after all, in the words of a devotee, the online encyclopedia has become “part of the plumbing of society”
.
But behind the scenes there is a world of cyber constant bickering, which some publishers deal site “battles to the death” with incredibly vain issues as the BBC tells David Gerard, a veteran contributor.
refers to the infamous “edit wars” in which volunteers who spend hours creating and watching -cariñosamente Wikipedia known as wikipedistas- faced by details contained in the more than 30 million pages . the site
For starters, Wikipedians are divided into two fields:
‘The “incluistas”, who believe that the more information is on the site, the better, even if the facts are not as well supported as a result, ‘The
“suprimistas” who prefer only the most relevant and verifiable facts fully appear.
So there is heated debate about whether it is Flo’Ball a sport or not -¿el fact that a handful of people playing it appears on YouTube supposedly counts as’ reliable coverage – and if an item fights the Nazis in space should appear on Wikipedia -is an item known novel alternative historical science fiction or just a silly conspiracy theory -.
Knut Adorable
In addition to the many philosophical bickering? , most conflicts are focused on how to interpret the guidelines of Wikipedia.
The PVN or neutral standpoint orders Wikipedians write “fair, proportionate and, insofar as possible, without bias. “
So far, so good.
Except when it comes to polar bear cubs.
Wikipedia’s devotees have been discussing-and discutiendo- discuss and describe whether an animal or a baby as “adorable” violates the rules of the online encyclopedia.
After all, being lovable is subjective and what a man (and usually is a man in the wiki) universe seems cute, the other was left unmoved.
The dispute over the “adorable” reached new levels in a war of publishers for the caption of an image showed that Knut, the polar bear born in the Berlin zoo in 2006 Finally the decision to remove the word was taken.
Less adorable, equally controversial
But that has not been by any means the only issues these wars, although some consider trivial, have dragged on for years.
Should ‘I’ “Star Trek Into Darkness” (Star Trek: in the dark) be capitalized
Is U2 an Irish band or just a band in Ireland
Is Jennifer Aniston? American or American-born? Could it be more or until Greek-American Greek-and-English-American
Istanbul is not Constantinople, but in English, do Istambul Istambul or write? Notice the difference? Is the controversial Dot the I
Some of the disputes are more noble reasons, as the ebb and whether the page in which you talk about arachnophobia image of a spider should appear.
“Too many disputes”
The relentless nature of these discussions discourages many new editors and, crucially, many publishers to participate in the site.
Wikipedia desperately needs more new recruits varied profiles. Editors ratio is between 8% and 15%. In addition, most Wikipedians are “Western” countries and technophiles.
Roberta Wedge a Wikipedian, down the pace of your activity on the site because he got tired “of some of the attitudes editors “.
” There are too many disputes behind the scenes and that’s not productive or helpful, “he tells the BBC.
A Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia, is concerned about the situation demographic but even supports many programs to get a more diverse group of editors, insists that the conflicting nature of the community of Wikipedians is beneficial.
“Define exactly where to draw the line is a complex issue and I’ve always wanted the community to continue having these debates, “he argues,” for the time quit is the moment you start to make mistakes. “
Related Content:
No comments:
Post a Comment