Wikis are articles or websites that can be created by anyone. However, these websites or articles can also be modified or edited by anyone as well whether it is the author or reader. The information provided in wikis are usually collaboration of multiple users rather than a single user.
To a limited degree, wikis can be an effective form of communication depending on the circumstance. Clearly, wikis are a powerful form of information sharing since anyone can provide the data with ease. When I mean anyone, I mean anyone around the world with internet can contribute their data which can be an effective method of communication. Since anyone can contribute data to wikis, it is not always guaranteed that the users provide valid data. Users of wiki site would usually know nothing about other users and fail distinguish whether the data or information given is reliable. Under the circumstance that a wiki site or article is very popular and contains many data contributions by multiple users, it can be a very effective form of communication since they tend to be more reliable and valid. However, if a certain wiki site is poorly visited and contributed by very few users the site or article can be a weak form of communication and lack reliable information. In this sort of circumstance, wikis are a weak form of communication and cannot be fully reliable. This matters deeply since wikis is starting to become a very commonly used site and users need to know that the information being exposed to is not completely valid. Being misinformed and misled by unreliable information can have negative effects as well. Wiki creators are aware of this and sometimes state certain information is fully valid by indicating a paragraph may need to be revised, need more citations or has been modified many times. Today, we should use wiki with care and distinguish between reliable and unreliable data.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that wiki is limited in being an effective way of communication. The fact that the quality of an article can be jeopardized by the open-author concept makes me wonder whether wikis contribute to creating a relatively ignorant generation of youth. I imagine youth access wikipedia as a quick reference point for knowledge, but if they themselves are able to edit it, who's to say that what they're viewing is correct? It's interesting to think that they can be authors of a concept they have no knowledge about. And if they intentionally mess with the content, there's really nothing stopping them let alone any form of deterrence/punishment in place for someone who knowingly gives out wrong or blashemous info on wiki.
ReplyDeleteSorry I forgot to sign my name at my last comment.
ReplyDelete- Katrina Rozal
I agree the fact that wikis can help the whole world communicate and gather information, however we should also learn the ability to tell what kind of information are reliable or unreliable. Although some of the information we see are cited by the authors, however we still need to double check on the orgin of the source and see if they are reliable. Of course, we prefer information that are written by professionals or other reliable people!
ReplyDelete