Blog Entry #3

After looking at my two partners' blog entries, I think creating a page on Roger Fidler or adding to 'The World Brain' are great ideas.  There is a great deal of information we could take from our class textbook, particularly from Fidler's article on technomyopia.  We could give a brief history of Fidler- his education, career, etc.- and then have a section on technopyopia.  I think using the example of video games that we talked about in class would be useful; it illustrates how they did not take off initially as expected, however, decades later they have changed the very way we use televisions.  After doing some research on Google, I also learned that Fidler is interested in 'mediamorphosis,' which could possibly be another section in our page on the 'visionary'- there is currently no site for 'mediamorphosis' on Wikipedia ether.  A site I found that may be particularly useful is the following: 

http://www.wtn.net/2004/bio40.html

This page describes Fidler and his work, including a brief biography and description of the work he considers "most innovative."  I had a hard time finding much more information on Fidler using Google, and found even less using Ask.com.  I am pretty confident we can gather enough information to create our own site on Fidler and his work, however, it may take a good deal of research and hunting around online to find everything.

There is also not a great deal of information on the World Brain or H.G. Wells either.  While they have a list of all his work, it may be interesting to add more information about his background, rationality behind the 'World Brain,' critcisms or praise for this idea, etc.  I think what Steph wrote on her blog would also be great information to add; we can find more in our textbook as well.  There is a great deal of information online about both H.G. Wells and the World Brain (such as https://sherlock.sims.berkely.edu/wells/world_brain.html) so I am not worried about finding information missing on Wikipedia.

The Controversy

The Wikipedia Controversy

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki

The first search tool I used for my second posting was dogpile.com, a metasearch engine. Because I was not sure how much information is online about how Wikipedia may be controversial, and because metasearch engines are good at finding information on rare topics, I hoped that dogpile may lead me in the right direction. The first search terms I used were “against Wikipedia,” assuming this would take me to pages, organizations or individuals that take an anti-Wikipedia stance. The first site I found that looked promising was titled ‘A Stand Against Wikipedia,’ located on the ‘Insider Higher Ed’ Website. This site describes itself as “the online source for news, opinion and jobs for all of higher education,” and was founded by three prestegious journalism experts. I therefore consider it to be very reliable. In addition, the article is relatively recent as it was written on January 26, 2007.

The argument that this article illustrates is very useful for our presentation as it provides an account of Middleburry Collge’s recent decision to ban students from citing the site. It outlines the opinion of those who are against Wikipedia, and how they are uneasy about the site’s reliability. The main reason I think this article is important, however, is that it provides a real-life example that the class will likely relate to; many students have had discussions with teachers as to the site’s credibility. It also has quotes from Wikipedia spokespeople defending the site, which are useful. While the anti-Wikipedia individual people’s evidence is simply sites with incorrect information, the article actually includes a study by Roy Rosenweig who “did an analsis of the accuracy of Wikipedia.” Finally, there are an incredible number of personal comments on the article which may be useful to include as further opponents to (or defendents of, depending) the website.

http://www.thebayareaintellect.com/jimmy-wales-founder-of-wikipedia-speaks-at-common-wealth-club/

In a comment posted on the first article I chose, a man explains how the founder of Wikipedia recently spoke about the proper use of the site. There was a link to the website where this second article was located, which I then followed. Searching that site, for the Bay Area Intellect, I found an article titled, ‘Jimmy Wales, Founder Of Wikipedia, Speaks At The Common Wealth Club.’ The information I found was very interesting; it cited the founder as explaining that Wikipedia “should not be considered a citable reference or primary source.” He then explains how Wikipedia ensures the accuracy of its articles, and furthermore how this is not very difficult. This article will be useful as it provides a defense for Wikipedia- the founder explains the other side of the story for those who are in favor of the site. The website, thebayareaintellect.com, is run by two editors who write about talks that occur in the San Francisco area. I consider the information credible, as it sites its sources and provides direct quotes from the conference, which can be checked against other sources with transcripts of the talk.