It’s a ~pedia. A question pops up in my mind while reading this article. Charm of Wikipedia by John Broughton. If it is called pedia, there is a good chance which has similar contents to other encyclopedias. Even though, not exact same phrase or content layouts, maters, or things from history must be the same, unless it’s censored. Why not we just rephrase whatever in the encyclopedia, and put it onto wiki? First of all, the source information comes from a reliable source. Second of all, we can focus on the newer topics of which encyclopedia may not cover on time, such as modern histories, recent technology evolutions, or space frontier. I believe some of the articles have been over killing and over killing, but one thing I believe it’s true. That is, it takes a long cycle to compose, revise, proof read, and finalized for one particular topic. Maybe that’s why only a few contributors’ works survive due to its accuracy of information.
Tagsalternative alternative press alternative_media badke Badke William blog blogging boyd copyright course CUNY+ Database databases Digital Age digital media technology digital_media documentation education evaluation facebook fair use folksonomy free free music gatekeepers google Google Scholar hierarchies homework information internet Journal keywords Lu media metadata music pavlik plagiarism politics privacy public Radiohead readings Record Companies Record Labels research research paper research politics research proposal research_paper research_project Scholar schools Search Search Engine search engines searching social social media social network Social Networking Social Networking Websites sources strategies Strategies in Research tags technology teens Topic Traditional Information web2.0 Wikipedia writing youtube
- Anne Leonard
- Jeff Brown