My favorite website is Wikipedia.
Whenever I encounter a new concept or event or person that I want to learn about, Wikipedia has all the answers.
The articles are organized neatly into sections, and there are links to other pages and sources so I can continue learning about a particular theme from different angles.
The wealth of information on Wikipedia is seemingly endless. There are 6.49 million Wikipedia articles in the English language alone, and it’s growing all the time. That was the number as of Monday, April 251. At the beginning of the year, there were only 6.43 million.
As comprehensive a resource as Wikipedia is, it has somewhat of a bad reputation. It’s probably among the sources most commonly forbidden by teachers and professors, and it’s definitely not a source you’d cite in marketing content.
Even so, Wikipedia is a seriously underrated resource for learning. Just because it’s open-source and virtually anyone can contribute doesn’t mean the content within is low-quality or untrustworthy. Just the opposite, actually.
Wikipedia has an army of volunteer editors that review changes made to articles. They have lengthy discussions, all of which anyone can see, about whether to keep or delete changes.
There are 43.45 million registered Wikipedia accounts2, and an unknown number of unregistered people who contribute as well. Only a small number of people are truly active, though; 1 percent of users are responsible for 77 percent of its content3.
Who are these people? According to Wikimedia:
- 83.7% are men.
- 61% live in North America or Europe.
- 89% of US editors and 85% of British editors are white4.
These statistics have stayed fairly stable for years, despite the fact that every five weeks, 40 percent of the 1 percent of frequent contributors leave.
Wikimedia is a global organization, and ideally, Wikipedia would be equally accessible in all areas of the world. But it’s not quite there yet, and this limitation is reflected in the demographics of its contributors. If the majority of them are white, Western men, how can they have a worldly perception to draw from?
Gender bias is also a real concern on Wikipedia. Consider the fact that Stanleyetta Titus, the first woman admitted to the New York state bar, lacks an article — but you can find 4,000+ words on former New England Patriots tight-end Rob Gronkowski, complete with 369 references5.
Despite these flaws, Wikipedia still holds merit. It’s a powerful resource for finding good information on a vast range of topics. Next time you’re learning something new on Wikipedia, just remember these 3 tips:
- Use the linked citations to check the veracity of a fact.
- Check details through multiple sources.
- Know that not every single aspect of human knowledge can be found here.
And … have fun! Wikipedia is an adventure.
References:
- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Size_of_Wikipedia
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedians
- https://www.vice.com/en/article/7x47bb/wikipedia-editors-elite-diversity-foundation
- https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Insights/Community_Insights_2021_Report/Thriving_Movement#Community_and_Newcomer_Diversity
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Gronkowski
Cheers,
Michelle
