During the short amount of time I’ve spent as a wikipedia editor, the one thing that I’m really happy with-despite it hindering me-is just how much you need to go through to get changes made to an article. I couldn’t simply go in and make changes, all of the ones I even made to my two articles have already been taken down due to improper sourcing. There was a lot of red tape you had to go through to make sure in a way, you need to make sure that not only is it properly sourced, but also make sure everything is formatted correctly and that it falls within the terms set by wikipedia or else it will get taken down by other editors. While I’m a little disappointed that my changes did get taken down, I’m more so happy that they were reviewed and edited, so that way I know in the future that everything I read on wikipedia is in some way shape or form looked over and edited. Going forward in the future, I think this will make me more inclined to trust a good amount of what I read on the site. I used to think that while I could use it to look for more sources on different topics, I was a little reticent to trust any information that wasn’t basic things like dates, names etc, but now, since I know everything that gets put into the articles are monitored, and isn’t as simple as inputting information and clicking enter, you have to properly format your sources and put real effort into what you’re writing. I don’t believe someone who’s simply trolling or trying for a practical joke would go through so much effort just for that.
Leave a Reply