In the book titled, New New Media, Levinson argues about Wikipedia which he describes “the most through-going, constantly user-driven system on the Internet” (90). To start, I think it’s crazy that people visit Wikipedia every now and then and edit information on many different topics. Everyone has access to it at all times. This is why it is very known that Wikipedia cannot be trusted, therefore unreliable. It’s good to know that Wikipedia pages get locked and shut down entirely out of people’s control. People feel like they have a lot of ownership which I think is interesting. Last year, the day that selected sites were shut down, such sites like Wikipedia was shut down, and people had no control. But did it affect anyone? Wikipedia is moderated. But, any user can edit information at whatever time. I learned from today’s class that if the add-ons are inappropriate, the admin will delete it, and comment back and tell the person the reason. Since all readers of Wikipedia can be editors of the site, a preliminary survey reported that 90 percent of Wikipedia edits were made by the top 15 percent of the most active Wikipedia editors. A section of the lengthy Chapter is titled, “Does Wikipedia Make Libraries Unnecessary?” I thought this question was interesting. Can Wikipedia be seen as an Encyclopedia? A question proposed in our class discussion. In my opinion, Wikipedia makes libraries necessary. Like mentioned before, most of the information on Wikipedia is not true. It’s always something that’s changing it’s so easy to edit (no account needed) and vandalizes a page. Wikipedia is basically volunteering. Overall, Wikipedia is not any better than a library. A library has real sources from actual sources and books that back up their theories.
**Awhile back, I used to rely on Wikipedia for all my information until I found out that it was edited by random people. I never really knew why teachers would always say to stay away from Wikipedia, I now know why…it all makes sense.