Has Wikipedia Been Misunderstood?

A variety of SEM images of Fern Spores -Photo Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

I recall all throughout high school that we were always told “Wikipedia is not a good source, do not use it as it isn’t reputable or reliable”. Now, this wasn’t just one of my teachers mind you, it was all of them, and I know that many of my peers had the same experience through their educational years; whether high school or post-secondary many of us were taught to avoid the website like the plague.

Yet we all used it anyways.

Now, there is definitely some truth to the fact that Wikipedia can be unreliable. After all, it’s an open source encyclopedia which anyone can edit. But there’s no denying its usefulness, and as anyone who’s ever needed to quickly look something up can attest to, it’s great for quick, at-a-glance information. And as I’ve gotten more of a look under the hood of how the website it run I was surprised to find out just how much debate and back-and forth the community has about some edits. Individuals from all over the world vet each others’ contributions, promoting and adding to what is beneficial and stopping the trolls from doing rampant damage.

It’s not the end all and be all of research, but it was never meant to be. Yes, primary journal articles and secondary sources such as textbooks will continue to remain as the sources we should consult when doing research, but for a starting point when learning about a new topic Wikipedia is an invaluable tool.

That’s why I’ve been so excited to learn about becoming a Wikipedian and editing articles to provide the most accurate, up-to-date information possible. We all use it, so it’s only fair that we should contribute with what we can. One article in particular that I’ll be looking at and adding to is about the plant Ceratopteris richardii, more commonly known by the name ‘C-Fern’. This plant is one that is seeing increased usage in labs around the world, both as a model organism for studying plants in a more general sense, as well as a commonly used observational study for introductory plant and botany courses in Universities and Colleges.

As I get more involved with Wikipedia I encourage you to do the same. I understand that not everyone has the time or desire to edit and contribute to articles, but we should all understand a bit about the behind the scenes of a website that, quite frankly, the internet wouldn’t be the same without.

Update (April 2020):

While I first started editing and adding to Wikipedia articles through the main website, utilizing the tools and education provided through Wikipedia Edu enabled me to more effectively edit pages and communicate with other Wikipedians. One of the main things that I had difficulty in understanding how to use was the talk page of articles. It comes as no surprise to me that many people don’t even realize their existence, as I know for a fact I did not prior to creating a Wikipedia account.

Even after editing some articles and adding sources, citations, and links, the talk page was something I tended to ignore. The fact that it is only editable while viewing the Wikicode (rather than the simplified UI of editing the main article) only added to the mystery surrounding what exactly this page was and how to use it.

The educational modules and videos allowed me to better understand the purpose of the talk page and how to use it effectively, and I have since done so.

While I continue to edit main articles through adding text, fixing citations, and adding new ones, I have been using the talk page more, as it is something that is often lacking in detail, and the incredible communication that it allows between editors (that is visible to lurkers as well!) is something that adds to the transparency and quality of the articles on Wikipedia.

After adding to the article page about Ceratopteris richardii, (including uploading my own photos to Wikimedia commons and linking them!) I later went back to review the talk page, which I found had not been edited or updated since 2013! I found this to be a great opportunity to make some changes with mentioning what is needed in the article as well as classifying it as a “start” rather than the “stub” it had been a few months prior.

I look forward to continue using Wikipedia, and especially utilizing the talk page to its full potential, communicating article issues with other editors and deciding on the best content and format that should be included and used in any given page.

Leave a comment

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started