Related Post: Unimpressive Journalism: Why ZDNet's Jennifer Leggio is Wrong (and why it matters)

Wikipedia in English
Wikipedia en français
Wikipedia en Español
Wikipedia en Italiano
Vicipaedia Latina 

Vicipaedia est opus commune, quo creetur encyclopaedia libera interretialis. Omnes ad contribuendum invitantur! Vicipaedia adhuc habet 22 408 commentationes.

Disclaimers:

• I don't know Jimmy Wales personally 
  
• It was alleged Jimmy Wales took money for making proposed Wikipedia edits
• Gossip on Jimmy Wales can be found on Gawker.com
• The inside joke referred to in the title is a meme from YouTube.
  

See also:

Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0 (Sydney Morning Herald)

Students Advised by Professors not to Use Wikipedia by Svetlana Gladkova of Profy

Wikipedia - Lamest Edit Wars Ever

Wikipedia censorship highlights a lingering sting in the tail - the Guardian

Encyclopedia Dramatica

Introduction

I hear a lot of misinformation about Wikipedia on the interwebs. I spent a good deal of time learning how to contribute, and this is my defense of the resounding success that I consider Wikipedia to be. For example: as a contributor, it guides you through an education in Wikis and writing as an encyclopedia editor.

My Wikipedia User Page   

First, a challenge to the legions of people I've heard make criticisms or offhand suggestions: Get thee onto Wikipedia, and make yourself heard there, or befriend a Wikipedia editor.

It's not that some of you could not hold the key to unique improvements to Wikipedia. You should however apply due diligence beforehand so as to be credible.

Scope of project

This project is encyclopedic in scope, obviously. In its brief life it has come to challenge the very best Encyclopedias. It continues to compare favorably to Britannica, and is ever adapting to new situations.

The physical and virtual embodiments of references like this have advantages and disadvantages, but the ubiquity of the internet gives Wikipedia the edge. I've heard Britannica is moving online and toward volunteer contributions.

The project is free from licensing restrictions — see Copyright page. That alone is a Herculean accomplishment.

The license Wikipedia uses grants free access to our content in the same sense that free software is licensed freely. This principle is known as copyleft. Wikipedia content can be copied, modified, and redistributed so long as the new version grants the same freedoms to others and acknowledges the authors of the Wikipedia article used (a direct link back to the article is generally thought to satisfy the attribution requirement). Wikipedia articles therefore will remain free under the GFDL and can be used by anybody subject to certain restrictions, most of which aim to ensure that freedom.

Living document

Wikipedia is a living document. For example, Stephen Colbert's new term "truthiness" has an entry. In the spirit of good-natured fun, he challenged his viewers to modify his page more than once.

 

Anyone can contribute

 

But not everyone should. If you haven't the patience or inclination to learn the intricacies of contribution, that's just fine. I hope others will at least dip their toe into the water to see if contributing to the content is something they'd like to try.

Self-guided participation

Wikipedia has guidelines available to assist in learning policies on neutral point of view, verifiability, no original research, and biographies of living persons.

Wikipedia's List of Policies Page is required reading and can be considered a touchstone for how to manage a massive collaborative online effort.

Talk pages, revisions

Behind every page is a revision history, and many pages have a "talk" page where contributors work out their differences, with varying degrees of success.

You can always find established editors and ask questions on their talk page. Editor's duties include helping new contributors follow Wikipedia's guidelines. Please drop me a note on my Talk Page if you do join Wikipedia!

Edit fights, kerfuffles, lock-downs

Sarah Palin, the recently-announced GOP Vice Presidential candidate for 2008, has had a rapid Wikipedia makeover.  At the moment, that page shows a "lock" icon in the upper-right corner which links to the Wikipedia Protection Policy. There are a lot of goodies in Wikipedia's "Special Pages" page, including lists of "globally blocked IP addresses" for example.

 

Anonymous contribution, sock puppets

 

It is unusual to allow anonymous contribution, but I think it important enough to preserve in spite of the difficulties. I can't think of a better way to allow a whistle-blower to contribute to an article. The facts once connected can be vetted and the anonymity of the contributor allows it to happen at all.

Actually, to be clearer, Wikileaks.org is the place for whistle-blowers. My point still applies to anyone who has a (valid) Wikipedia contribution to make, but would not if they had to attach their name. I believe this is why anonymous contribution is still possible on Wikipedia, in spite of numerous problems stemming from interested, biased parties editing Wikipedia to distort facts and inject opinion.

Stephen Colbert's Wikipedia entry is a magnet for Wikipedia defacers. See the last 500 revisions of his page here.  Watch out for contributor's names in red; it indicates they have no user page. Others, such as user "Purplecowsthatcluckrcool" have been removed due to spam, abuse, defacement, or sock puppetry.

You dislike your Wikipedia photo

Cry me a river, why don't you. At least you are a living "person of note" who has a Wikipedia entry. Wikipedia is more focused on language, not media assets, of course. Still, it is possible to add photographs and audio clips subject to extensive restrictions.  You need to find media that the creator is willing to freely license for re-distribution.  Wikimedia Commons is the mechanism for this.  I can help, provided you give me the content, clear it with the creator, and provide me with contact info.