NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) and Enescot (talk) are heavily involved in editing the Wikipedia
article on Global Warming. Click on their names to see their profiles. Then
read their pages again.
How does this information make you feel about the credibility and
validity of information on Wikipedia? Justify your stance using concrete
examples.
I feel that after reading NewsAndEventsGuy’s page, I think he is very knowledgeable
and tries to follow the rules and guidelines of Wikipedia and copyright
policies. For example, in the section drought image NewsAndEventsGuy gets told
that an image he used was not a public domain photo. He fixed the problem from
what I can see and from the remaining conversation. Also, in terms of his
knowledge. He is quick to come up with facts that back his edits.
Enescot seems like an enthusiast rather than an expert. In the section
titled “citation procedure”, he wasn’t as on top of things as NewsAndEventsGuy.
He lacked in his initiative to fix problems, especially in editing citation
errors. He posted links with his comments on other Wikipedia pages, which did
not work or sent the user to a different place than listed.
Due to these recent findings, I feel that Wikipedia has a good group of
experts that peer-review everything that is written on its pages. Enescot was
told about the mistakes he had made, as well as NewsAndEventsGuy. This makes me
feel more secure in the credibility and validity of information on Wikipedia.
No comments:
Post a Comment