I feel that in ten years, Wikipedia will be the go to source for accurate information. I think that as time goes on, because Wikipedia is the go to source, a better way to weed out inaccurate posts will be developed therefor leaving us with a solid foundation for information. I remember in grade school, Encyclopedia Britannica was the go to source. But even then, when researching current topics, they were nowhere to be found in the encyclopedia.
Ironically I wiki'd Encyclopedia Britannica and learned that the editions only come out every 25 years or so. This is a ridiculously long time to wait to get the most up to date scholarly information. Even with new publications, each edition takes about 10 years to compile, which also adds to how inaccurate this reference can become. Even though wikipedia definitely has it's inaccuracies, at least an incorrect fact can be corrected instantly. Also, wikipedia contains the most up to date information.
I tested this theory by seeing what information they have for the Philadelphia Phillies. They have last week's NL East Championship listed in the stats and below the box it states that "These statistics are current as of October 11, 2010." I think this way of getting information is the quickest and best way to get information. Encyclopedia Britannica doesn't stand a chance in our society. We expect instant results. Having to wait 25 years for the latest scholarly information sounds quite silly for someone who grew up with the internet boom and seeing how the world has evolved around current technology. I personally feel that wikipedia is an accurate way to get information. I'd rather rely on this source and risk being wrong than risk looking into an outdated, biased book.
No comments:
Post a Comment