Wikipedia

예전에 졸업이 달린 에세이 Strategic repositioning within academia:arguing for the statement that Cultural Anthropology belongs to the humanities and not to the social sciences b.yokim.net/54/ 에서 위키피디어를 대거 (?) 인용 한 나로선 훅! 찔리는 글이네. 나름대로 권위를 주기 위해 브리태니커도 뒤져보기는 했지만, 아무래도 내가 지양하는 critical cultural studies 쪽은 브리태니커 의 인문 설명에선 코드가 안 맞는 쪽이 많아서. 교수님은 어떻게 보셨을까, 듣도 보도 못한 (젊긴 하지만.. 아마도?) 백과사전을 인용하는 것을. 전문가 의견이라는 것, 거 참 어려운 문제.

리드미 파일 링크 보고 따라갔음. (리드미님 닉이 블로그 이름이 되니 걍 “리드미 파일” 이라고 불러도 안 잡힐것 같아 좋다.

Wikipedia Faces Growing Pains
By Daniel Terdiman
wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,66210,00.html?tw=rss.CUL
02:00 AM Jan. 10, 2005 PT

To academics like Danah Boyd, a graduate student and instructor at the University of California at Berkeley, that is precisely the problem: Wikipedia, for all its breadth of coverage, cannot claim that each and every one of its entries meets any bottom-line standard for accuracy.

“Usually there’s only one or two people involved in writing the entries,” Boyd said, “and you don’t know anything about who they are.”

To Boyd, who said she finds the project “an exceptionally valuable tool,” the problem is that while some entries, particularly those about technology, are well-read and edited by many community members, countless others have received little or no scrutiny.

“Guess what?” Boyd said. “A lot of ancient-history specialists? They’re not online, let alone involved in Wikipedia. But a lot of students are going to Wikipedia for information on ancient history.”

…………..

former Wikipedia developer Lawrence Sanger addressed a litany of problems with the project.

In some Wikipedia areas, “academics and experts of all sorts generally are not accorded any sort of special respect by some Wikipedians,” Sanger told Wired News. “If someone is made to defend his or her contribution by some crank, or a troll, the rest of the community, generally speaking, will not come to the defense of the expert.”
….
And that’s a problem, Sanger believes, in trying to build a large, well-respected resource.

“There needs to be some sort of deference to expertise,” he said. “I think the managers of Wikipedia need to be creative about how this sort of problem can be solved.”