More

Wikipedia Celebrates 10th Anniversary, Aims For Greater Diversity

DANA WOLLMAN   01/12/11 05:10 PM ET   AP

Wikipedia

NEW YORK — Wikipedia, the online trove of assorted facts and trivia, is trying to be more well-rounded.

As the encyclopedia nears its 10th birthday on Saturday, its leaders are seeking a more diverse group of editors – specifically, women, people in developing countries and people with expertise in assorted disciplines.

Wikipedia is about to open an office in India and wants to expand further in Brazil, Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries. Today, 20 percent of the site's pages are written in English, but the organization expects that to change over the next 10 years.

"Everybody brings their crumbs of knowledge to the table and all those crumbs become a banquet. And we're missing some people from the table," said Sue Gardner, executive director of the Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit that runs Wikipedia.

As it is, said Jimmy Wales, the site's founder, the average Wikipedia editor is a well-educated twenty-something – and most likely male. Eighty percent of its editors are men and they include twice as many people with Ph.D.s as the general population.

In an effort to diversify, the San Francisco-based non-profit is recruiting students from 16 college campuses, including Harvard and Georgetown. Wikipedia is trying to teach young people what it takes to curate the website's entries. Cooperating professors, for instance, will assign their classes to write encyclopedia entries about public policy, complete with footnotes.

"Students are the fuel that power Wikipedia because they're engaged in the world of writing, researching, summarizing, citing," Gardner said.

In particular, Wales said the site could use help from people well-versed in the humanities, a weaker area for Wikipedia's geeky first editors. In part, Wikipedia is working to make its editing software easier to use, but it is also reaching out to libraries and other organizations to tap different talents. It's working with museums, for instance, to develop richer, more informative entries about the arts, including photo galleries of notable works.

While the site's leaders admit it could be more diverse, they insist Wikipedia is comparable in accuracy to other encyclopedias. Gardner, a former journalist, said even under the guise of a respected media outlet, humans make mistakes.

In part, though, the site has had to award special editing privileges to trusted editors while preventing newer contributors from spreading misinformation. In the wake of the shootings in Arizona this weekend that left six dead and Rep. Gabrielle Giffords seriously wounded, the site posted a warning, reminding readers that the story was developing. It also allowed only a select group of experienced editors to make changes. Still, the site initially reported that Giffords had been killed, following unverified reports from outlets such as Reuters, NPR and CNN.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST TECH

NEW YORK — Wikipedia, the online trove of assorted facts and trivia, is trying to be more well-rounded. As the encyclopedia nears its 10th birthday on Saturday, its leaders are seeking a more d...
NEW YORK — Wikipedia, the online trove of assorted facts and trivia, is trying to be more well-rounded. As the encyclopedia nears its 10th birthday on Saturday, its leaders are seeking a more d...
Filed by Bianca Bosker  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 4
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MikeyJaii
Socialism.
11:15 PM on 01/12/2011
Wiki! The new open source for everything!!
09:59 PM on 01/12/2011
The hive mind is to celebrate diversity?!
09:45 PM on 01/12/2011
Wikipedia think that their so called"experts"know everything in the universe,they Don't!,one of their pinhead editors wiped out facts(check page history) in regards to Spencer Tunick aswell as BANKSY,i.e.their meeting in Australia at Byron Bay in 2001,with the reclusive Australian Artist and Inventor James DeWeaver,check his BLOG on jamesdeweaver.com,and you'll notice DeWeaver was pivotal in Tunick's 2001 Byron Bay Installation happening,which Wikipedia removed the link to in Tunick's Wikipedia page,and just left Byron Bay which is internally linked to Wikipedia,GREAT,leaving the viewer with "no way" to see the Installation which can only be seen on DeWeaver's website,aswell the photo on his site clearly included BANKSY!Though Tunick in his 2010 interview pre Opera House 5,000 nudes with smh.com.au,a major Metro newspaper,talks about James DeWeaver and the trip to Byron Bay,because of Tunick not knowing or remembering ten years back who was at that Installation exactly,as if he would,it is disregarded as fact,purely because Spencer said so is beyond belief!Wikipedia wouldn't know one way or the other if BANKSY stencilled a parachuting rat with clothespeg on its nose ,but because it's not in a newspaper,they assume it didn't happen ,even when it did!Wikipedia's over-zealous editors ruin the true facts with their inability to rely purely on what's written in newspapers!DeWeaver's a recluse!Doesn't do interviews,what don't Wikipedia get?The piece BANKSY did was taken down by the owners of the Arts Factory when they found out its value in 2008!So much for Wikipedia,their all full-on losers anyway!
09:42 PM on 01/12/2011
The last paragraph of this article is not only off-topic, but misguided. On wikipedia, reports from Reuters, NPR, and CNN are by definition "reliable sources" that are to be used for "verification". It is, in fact, against the "guidelines" of wikipedia for an editor to include their "original research" (such as independently verified facts that do not appear in any reliable sources). Information on wikipedia is meant to be verifiable from reliable sources, not looked into by random editors.

As an interesting comparison to other encyclopedias, I'd ask if there are any other encyclopedias that currently contain any content on this shooting.

Also, it should be pointed out that the use of "the site" in the final paragraph is misguided in that all actions described are simply taken by the several editors of wikipedia. For example, anyone in the world could post "a warning, reminding readers that the story was developing" on a random article.