User:FieldMarine/Observations

FieldMarine's observations of Wikipedia.

After a few years working on Wikipedia, here are a few of my thoughts.

1. Wikipedia leans to the recent. Unfortunately, most of the information presented on a subject tends to focus on recent events. This is partly because many of the references for the articles tend to be Internet centric.

2. Wikipedia is not reliable (at least according to many academics). Articles on general subjects or those that are mature tend to be more reliable because more people have worked on them over time. In fact, these articles benefit from multiple, even international points of view, which, in my humble opinion, make the articles even more reliable and well-rounded than traditional encyclopedias. Traditional encyclopedias suffer from a narrow perspective with articles written by smaller groups of like-minded researchers. A benefit of Wikipedia is the wide-range of articles, even on unusual subjects. However, esoteric subjects or recent articles may only rely on perspective of a few people, making them more unreliable. This should correct itself over time. Anyway, it's certainly a good place to start.

3. Wikipedia harnesses a global view (at least potentially). The fact that Wikipedia can harness an international perspective on subjects is a truly cool part about the project. As an a contributor, I have gained tremendous insight on a subject during collaboration with others. As a person with an interest in military history, I look forward to seeing an article of a current war, or even a battle where both side write about it in real time based on their point of view, or perspective. That to me would be really interesting to see, and perhaps serve as a medium to exchange dialogue to resolve the issue.