
Last week I read an item about Adam Curry, aka the "podfather," making some rather
self-aggrandizing changes to Wikipedia's entry on podcasting. Apparently he's not the only one gaming the system, as the entry on
John Seigenthaler actually claimed he was implicated in the assassination of Robert Kennedy! In light of these issues,
BetaNews reports Wikipedia may have to change some of the way it works. While normally the system has a sort of checks-and-balances operation by way of the
numerous contributors, lately the size and depth of articles might have become too much. Also, items like Seigenthaler's entry can get buried among the newer entries. Either way, it seems to me a prudent move to somehow balance the open nature of a wiki against the veracity of entries. Some balk at a registration system, but I think it's the only way to make sure Wikipedia stays relevant and useful.
Comments
4
Subscribe to commentsBrianDec 5th 2005 5:15PM
It will be unfortunate if the Wiki starts to lose relevance if people change the entries to reflect themselves. I think that a registration system would be a good idea. Another option is that each "change" to the entry has to be confirmed by two other people as well before it is put into place.
WillDec 5th 2005 6:29PM
If they have to make a registration, it should only be for large revisions. For smaller ones (like fixing a spelling mistake), it shouldnt be necessary to register.
PatrickDec 6th 2005 8:14AM
I like WikiPedia, I find it useful. Unfortunately, I have seen people abusing it. I have seen people taking the rules that they apply to their own site and then apply those rules to the WikiPedia entry related to their site, etc.
rebootjacDec 9th 2005 9:42PM
I have read a couple of articles about this issue. From what I have been gathering though, the registration system will only used for submitting articles not editing them. I may be wrong though as that still leaves an awful lot of analysis for the wikipedians to sort thru.