Life Lessons From Wikipedia… Dalby Part 2

I am sorry, but I had to do it… For all the students at Middlebury College…

The following is taken from the “Wikipedia” entry at Wikipedia.org …

-The Wikipedia community has developed many policys and guidelines to improve the encyclopedia; however, it is not a formal requirement to be familiar with them before contributing.

-What is contributed is more important than the expertise or qualifications of the contributor.

As a contributor using the pseudonym “The Cunctator explains on his user page: To be a good Wikipedian, be respectful, overly combative, self-critical, vulnerable, hortatory, ambitious and analytical. Above all, to be a good Wikipedian, edit and create entries.(Dalby 121)

After finishing Andrew Dalby’s book, I think what I like most about Wikipedia is the fact that there is no hierarchy. The Cuncatator, which means the ‘delayer,’ understands that the human condition is one long extended process. The principles which Wikipedians practice to ensure the their community lives on are based on progress, not perfection. And, as Dalby explained to his readers, the community good is larger than any one person. When co-founder Larry Sanger tried to enforce, what he believed, was his authority by stating on a Wikipedia talk page that: “When push comes to shove, if a decision must be made and there’s a serious controversy, and I’m partaking of it, sorry, but I’ll get my way. And you’ll be expected to hold your tongue after that.”(Dalby 122) The co-founder, after some communal debate, was informed that his employer could no longer afford his salary. Wikipedia, as a group, apparently has a conscience, and it won over Sanger’s ego.


Dalby, who is obviously a passionate supporter of Wikipedia, does not hesitate to outline the downside of Wikipedia which according to their website is "written collaboratively by volunteers around the world" who write without pay. He talks about the commercial spam and vandalism (purposeful misinformation) on the site as problems which undermine the  credibility of Wikipedia as a reliable news source. But, as the author states, “vandalism and spam are not the fault of the servers, ot the site itself, or the software. They are our fault as human beings. We’re given access to the site, we’re bored and stupid and we write childish and unpleasant things and leave a mess; we’re greedy and we add links that we think will bring us money. (Dalby 212) Dalby might as well be talking about the population in general, not just Wikipedia." By this I mean, usually it's a small minority who step out of line and cause trouble for the larger population. Most folks on Wikipedia play by the rules, and the few that don't cause most of the trouble.

 “The officially openly-stated view of Wikipedia is that it’s a work in progress. It isn’t a reliable source and shouldn’t be cited as if it were.” (Dalby 191) However, the author concludes his book by summarizing the site’s cooperation with the global media in the kidnapping of New York Times reporter David Rohde. Wikipedia showed it’s maturity level by keeping any facts about the incident off it’s site until after the reporter had escaped and was safe. (Dalby 223-225) It seems the site and the community may be growing up. And with 3,445,161 articles, 21,896,032 pages in total, 420,535,401 edits, 852,833 uploaded files and 13,249,643 registered users, Wikipedia is probably here to stay.


PS The above statistics were taken from the Wikipedia site… so be careful, they may unreliable…(Another win for the students at Middlebury!)