I was just thinking about a recent discussion my CALL Workshop had about “media literacy” and general “literacy,” and the comments exchanged about the reliability of a site such as Wikipedia. I think it goes without saying that Wikipedia is never going to be accepted as an academic source, but it remains a pretty accurate and accessible tool. (And one student was exactly right when she mentioned she might do preliminary research there and then go further with primary resources that are mentioned – I have done the same thing many times when “feeling out” a concept or issue. Check any lengthy article – usually very well documented and a good spring board! And if not well footnoted there are very obvious warnings at the top).
I have conducted the workshops for two years and I think at least 150 people have passed through. A lot of teachers are open-minded and some are fans of Wikipedia. Another group are fairly resolute in a stance that Wikipedia is inaccurate, prone to character attack, and full of articles of dubious quality. A Toronto-based writer I often mention, Don Tapscott, outlines the issue quite well in his book Wikinomics. (Not about Wikipedia as such but about collaboration in the new economy).
Anyway, read for yourself. And discover that Wikipedia may have its flaws, but it has grown more reliable over the years, and is pretty much the work of a small army of very committed people – writers, curators, and staff. There’s lots of evidence that Wikipedia has merit – and that criticisms of it are out of date and unfounded. Examples Don gives include the fact that articles on important people are “locked” (i.e. George W. Bush). Obscenities are removed quickly. The list goes on. I have some insight into that process. A friend of mine is a Wikipedian, who writes on jazz and blues, and he told me he had to write or edit about 50 or more articles before he noticed that he was given a kind of “free pass” to contribute things without “Big Brother” watching over (yes Wikipedia has a very strict editorial process going on behind the scenes). Wikipedia deserves better than the uninformed assassination that it is often subject to. And educators need to be better educated on the topic!
Read an excerpt from Don Tapscott’s book Wikinomics via Google Books. Note this link may open in the middle of the chapter called “The Peer Pioneers.” Click back a few pages to get to the beginning of the discussion on Wikipedia. (As you may know, since this is a preview, some pages from the book have been omitted, so buy a copy or get it from your library!).