Jump to content

Wikipedia: Difference between revisions

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
ClueBot (talk | contribs)
1,596,818 edits
m Reverting possible vandalism by Mark Swingle I to version by Tktktk. False positive? Report it. Thanks, ClueBot. (621193) (Bot)
←Replaced content with '===CHANGE IT BACK, NOW!!==='
Line 1: Line 1:
===CHANGE IT BACK, NOW!!===
{{pp-semi-indef}}
{{pp-move-indef}}
{{Selfref|For Wikipedia's non-encyclopedic visitor introduction, see {{srlink|Help:About}}.}}
{{infobox Website
| name = Wikipedia
| logo = [[File:Wikipedia-logo.svg|135px|alt=White sphere made of large jigsaw pieces. Letters from many alphabets are shown on the pieces.]]
| screenshot = [[File:Www.wikipedia.org screenshot.png|border|300px|alt=Wikipedia's homepage with links to many languages.|Wikipedia's multilingual portal shows the project's different language editions.]]
| caption = Screenshot of Wikipedia's multilingual portal.
| url = http://wikipedia.org/
| type of organization = [[Nonprofit]]
| location = [[Miami]], [[Florida]]
| type = [[Internet encyclopedia project]]
| language = 240 active editions (272 in total)
| registration = Optional
| owner = [[Wikimedia Foundation]] ([[non-profit]])
| author = [[Jimmy Wales]], [[Larry Sanger]]<ref name=Sidener>{{cite news|url=http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20041206/news_mz1b6encyclo.html|author=Jonathan Sidener|title=Everyone's Encyclopedia|work=[[The San Diego Union-Tribune]]|accessdate=2006-10-15}}</ref>
| launch date = {{Start date and years ago|mf=yes|2001|1|15}}
| commercial = No
| alexa = 6<ref name="AlexaStats" />
| current status = Perpetual work-in-progress<ref>{{cite web |url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_a_work_in_progress |title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia is a work in progress |publisher=Wikipedia |accessdate=2008-07-03}}</ref>
| slogan = The free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.
| content license = {{nobr|[[Creative Commons licenses|Creative Commons Attribution/<br />Share-Alike]] 3.0}} and [[GFDL]] dual-license
}}
'''Wikipedia''' is a [[Free content|free]],<ref>Some versions, such as the [[English language]] version, contain non-free content.</ref> [[World Wide Web|web-based]], collaborative, [[multilingual]] [[encyclopedia]] project supported by the non-profit [[Wikimedia Foundation]]. Its 15 million articles (over 3.2 million in [[English Wikipedia|English]]) have been written collaboratively by volunteers around the world, and almost all of its articles can be edited by anyone with access to the site.<ref>In some parts of the world, the access to Wikipedia had been blocked.</ref> Wikipedia was launched in 2001 by [[Jimmy Wales]] and [[Larry Sanger]]<ref name=MiliardWho>{{cite news|url=http://www.cityweekly.net/utah/article-5129-feature-wikipediots-who-are-these-devoted-even-obsessive-contributors-to-wikipedia.html|author=Mike Miliard|title=Wikipediots: Who Are These Devoted, Even Obsessive Contributors to Wikipedia?|work=[[Salt Lake City Weekly]]|date=2008-03-01|accessdate=2008-12-18}}</ref> and is currently the largest and most popular general [[reference work]] on the [[Internet]].<ref name="AlexaStats">{{cite web|url=http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/wikipedia.org?range=5y&size=large&y=t|title = Five-year Traffic Statistics for Wikipedia.org|publisher=[[Alexa Internet]]|accessdate=2009-10-13 }}</ref><ref name=Tancer>{{cite news|url=http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1595184,00.html|title=Look Who's Using Wikipedia|author=Bill Tancer|date=2007-05-01|publisher=''[[Time (magazine)|Time]]''|accessdate=2007-12-01|quote=The sheer volume of content [...] is partly responsible for the site's dominance as an online reference. When compared to the top 3,200 educational reference sites in the U.S., Wikipedia is #1, capturing 24.3% of all visits to the category}} [[Cf.]] Bill Tancer (Global Manager, Hitwise), [http://weblogs.hitwise.com/bill-tancer/2007/03/wikipedia_search_and_school_ho.html "Wikipedia, Search and School Homework"], ''[[Hitwise]]'': An [[Experian]] Company ([[Blog]]), March 1, 2007. Retrieved December 18, 2008.</ref><ref name=Woodson>{{cite news |url=http://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSN0819429120070708 |title=Wikipedia remains go-to site for online news |date=2007-07-08|author=Alex Woodson |work=Reuters |accessdate=2007-12-16|quote=Online encyclopedia Wikipedia has added about 20 million unique monthly visitors in the past year, making it the top online news and information destination, according to Nielsen//NetRatings.}}</ref><ref name="AlexaTop500" />

Although the policies of the Wikipedia strongly espouse {{srlink|Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiability}} and a {{srlink|WP:NPOV|neutral point of view}}, [[Criticism of Wikipedia|critics of Wikipedia]] accuse it of [[systemic bias]] and inconsistencies (including undue weight given to [[popular culture]]),<ref name="SangerElitism" /> and allege that it favors consensus over credentials in its editorial process.<ref name="AcademiaAndWikipedia">{{cite web|author=Danah Boyd|url=http://many.corante.com/archives/2005/01/04/academia_and_wikipedia.php|title=Academia and Wikipedia|work=Many 2 Many: A Group [[Blog|Weblog]] on Social Software|publisher=Corante |date=2005-01-04|accessdate=2008-12-18|quote=[The author, Danah Boyd, describes herself as] an expert on social media[,] ... a doctoral student in the School of Information at the [[University of California, Berkeley]] [,] and a fellow at the [[Harvard University]] [[Berkman Center for Internet & Society]] [at [[Harvard Law School]].]}}</ref> Its [[Reliability of Wikipedia|reliability and accuracy]] are also targeted.<ref name="Who">{{cite web | url = http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2004/oct/26/g2.onlinesupplement | title = Who knows?|author=Simon Waldman|work=[[Guardian.co.uk]]|date=2004-10-26 | accessdate = 2007-02-11 | location=London}}</ref> Other criticisms center on its susceptibility to vandalism and the addition of spurious or unverified information,<ref name="DeathByWikipedia" /> though scholarly work suggests that vandalism is generally short-lived,<ref name="MIT_IBM_study">{{cite journal|author=Fernanda B. Viégas, Martin Wattenberg, and Kushal Dave|url=http://alumni.media.mit.edu/~fviegas/papers/history_flow.pdf|title=Studying Cooperation and Conflict between Authors with History Flow Visualizations|journal=Proceedings of the [[CHI (conference)|ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI)]]|publisher=ACM [[SIGCHI]]|id=ISBN 1-58113-702-8|pages=575–582|location=[[Vienna]], [[Austria]]|year=2004|format=PDF|accessdate=2007-01-24|doi=10.1145/985921.985953}}</ref><ref name="CreatingDestroyingAndRestoringValue">{{cite journal|author=Reid Priedhorsky, Jilin Chen, Shyong (Tony) K. Lam, Katherine Panciera, Loren Terveen, and John Riedl (GroupLens Research, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, [[University of Minnesota]])|title =Creating, Destroying, and Restoring Value in Wikipedia|journal =[[Association for Computing Machinery]] GROUP '07 conference proceedings|location =[[Sanibel Island]], [[Florida]]|date=2007-11-04|url =http://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~reid/papers/group282-priedhorsky.pdf|format=PDF|accessdate=2007-10-13}}</ref> and an investigation in ''[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]'' found that the material they compared came close to the level of accuracy of ''[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]'' and had a similar rate of "serious errors".<ref name="GilesJ2005Internet"/>

Wikipedia's departure from the expert-driven style of the encyclopedia building mode and the large presence of unacademic content have been noted several times. When ''[[Time (magazine)|Time]]'' magazine recognized [[You (Time Person of the Year)|You]] as its [[Time Person of the Year|Person of the Year]] for 2006, acknowledging the accelerating success of online collaboration and interaction by millions of users around the world, it cited Wikipedia as one of several examples of [[Web 2.0]] services, along with [[YouTube]], [[MySpace]], and [[Facebook]].<ref name=Time2006>{{cite news| date=2006-12-13| url= http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html |title= Time's Person of the Year: You |work=TIME |publisher=Time, Inc |accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref> Some noted the importance of Wikipedia not only as an encyclopedic reference but also as a frequently updated news resource because of how quickly articles about recent events appear.<ref name=Dee>{{cite news | url = http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/01/magazine/01WIKIPEDIA-t.html | title = All the News That's Fit to Print Out|author=Jonathan Dee|publisher = The New York Times Magazine|date=2007-07-01|accessdate=2007-12-01}}</ref><ref name=Lih>{{cite journal|author=Andrew Lih|title=Wikipedia as Participatory Journalism: Reliable Sources? Metrics for Evaluating Collaborative Media as a News Resource|journal=5th International Symposium on Online Journalism|location=[[University of Texas at Austin]]|date=2004-04-16|url=http://jmsc.hku.hk/faculty/alih/publications/utaustin-2004-wikipedia-rc2.pdf|format=PDF|accessdate=2007-10-13}}</ref>

The word ''Wikipedia'' ({{IPAc-en|ˌ|w|ɪ|k|ɨ|ˈ|p|iː|d|i|.|ə}} or {{IPAc-en|ˌ|w|ɪ|k|i|ˈ|p|iː|d|i|.|ə}} {{respell|WIK|i|PEE|dee-ə}}) is a [[portmanteau]] from ''[[wiki]]'' (a technology for creating collaborative [[website]]s, from the [[Hawaiian language|Hawaiian]] word ''[[wiktionary:wiki|wiki]]'', meaning "quick") and ''[[wiktionary:encyclopedia|encyclopedia]]''.

==History==
{{Main|History of Wikipedia}}
[[File:ImageNupedia.png|thumb|right|alt=Logo reading "Nupedia.com the free encyclopedia" in blue with large initial "N".|Wikipedia originally developed from another encyclopedia project, [[Nupedia]].]]
Wikipedia began as a complementary project for [[Nupedia]], a free online [[English language|English-language]] encyclopedia project whose articles were written by experts and reviewed under a formal process. Nupedia was founded on March 9, 2000, under the ownership of [[Bomis|Bomis, Inc]], a [[web portal]] company. Its main figures were [[Jimmy Wales]], Bomis [[CEO]], and [[Larry Sanger]], [[Editing|editor-in-chief]] for Nupedia and later Wikipedia. Nupedia was licensed initially under its own Nupedia Open Content License, switching to the [[GNU Free Documentation License]] before Wikipedia's founding at the urging of [[Richard Stallman]].<ref name="stallman1999">{{cite web
|url=http://www.gnu.org/encyclopedia/encyclopedia.html|title=The Free Encyclopedia Project|author=Richard M. Stallman|authorlink=Richard Stallman|date=2007-06-20|publisher=Free Software Foundation |accessdate=2008-01-04}}</ref>
[[File:Wikipedia Main Page.png|thumb|right|Main Page of English Wikipedia]]
Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales founded Wikipedia.<ref name=autogenerated1>{{cite news|url=http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20041206/news_mz1b6encyclo.html|author=Jonathan Sidener|title=Everyone's Encyclopedia|date=2004-12-06|work=[[The San Diego Union-Tribune]]|accessdate=2006-10-15}}</ref><ref name=Meyers>{{cite news|first=Peter |last=Meyers|title=Fact-Driven? Collegial? This Site Wants You |url=http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9800E5D6123BF933A1575AC0A9679C8B63&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fSubjects%2fC%2fComputer%20Software |work=New York Times |publisher=The New York Times Company |date=2001-09-20|accessdate=2007-11-22|quote=&nbsp;'I can start an article that will consist of one paragraph, and then a real expert will come along and add three paragraphs and clean up my one paragraph,' said Larry Sanger of Las Vegas, who founded Wikipedia with Mr. Wales.}}</ref> While Wales is credited with defining the goal of making a publicly editable encyclopedia,<ref name=SangerMemoir>{{cite news |first=Larry |last=Sanger |title=The Early History of Nupedia and Wikipedia: A Memoir |date=April 18, 2005 |work=Slashdot |url=http://features.slashdot.org/features/05/04/18/164213.shtml|accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref><ref name=Sanger>{{cite news|first=Larry |last=Sanger|title=Wikipedia Is Up!|date=January 17, 2001 |publisher=Internet Archive|url=http://web.archive.org/web/20010506042824/www.nupedia.com/pipermail/nupedia-l/2001-January/000684.html|accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref> Sanger is usually credited with the [[strategy]] of using a [[wiki]] to reach that goal.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2001-October/000671.html|title=Wikipedia-l: LinkBacks?|accessdate=2007-02-20}}</ref> On January 10, 2001, [[Larry Sanger]] proposed on the Nupedia [[electronic mailing lists|mailing list]] to create a wiki as a "feeder" project for Nupedia.<ref>{{cite news |first=Larry |last=Sanger|title=Let's Make a Wiki|date=2001-01-10|publisher=Internet Archive|url=http://www.nupedia.com/pipermail/nupedia-l/2001-January/000676.html|archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20030414014355/http://www.nupedia.com/pipermail/nupedia-l/2001-January/000676.html|archivedate=2003-04-14 |accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref>
Wikipedia was formally launched on January 15, 2001, as a single English-language edition at www.wikipedia.com,<ref name=WikipediaHome>{{cite web |url=http://www.wikipedia.com/|archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20010331173908/http://www.wikipedia.com/|archivedate=2001-03-31|title=Wikipedia: HomePage|accessdate=2001-03-31}}</ref> and announced by Sanger on the Nupedia mailing list.<ref name=SangerMemoir/> Wikipedia's policy of "neutral point-of-view"<ref name="NPOV">"[http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view&oldid=102236018 Wikipedia:Neutral point of view], Wikipedia (January 21, 2007)</ref> was codified in its initial months, and was similar to Nupedia's earlier "nonbiased" policy. Otherwise, there were relatively few rules initially and Wikipedia operated independently of Nupedia.<ref name=SangerMemoir/>

[[File:EnglishWikipediaArticleCountGraph linear.png|thumb|left|alt=Graph of number of articles and rate of increase showing article count doubling each year until the end of 2006, and becoming a linear increase in 2007.|Graph of the article count for the [[English Wikipedia]], from January 10, 2001, to September 9, 2007 (the date of the two-millionth article).]]
Wikipedia gained early contributors from Nupedia, [[Slashdot]] postings, and [[web search engine]] indexing. It grew to approximately 20,000 articles and 18 language editions by the end of 2001. By late 2002, it had reached 26 language editions, 46 by the end of 2003, and 161 by the final days of 2004.<ref>"{{cite web|url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Multilingual statistics |title=Multilingual statistics |work=Wikipedia |date=March 30, 2005 |accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref> Nupedia and Wikipedia coexisted until the former's servers were taken down permanently in 2003, and its text was incorporated into Wikipedia. [[English Wikipedia]] passed the 2 million-article mark on September 9, 2007, making it the largest encyclopedia ever assembled, eclipsing even the [[Yongle Encyclopedia]] (1407), which had held the record for exactly 600&nbsp;years.<ref name="EB_encyclopedia">{{cite encyclopedia |title=Encyclopedias and Dictionaries |encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica, 15th ed.|publisher= Encyclopædia Britannica |year=2007 |volume=18 |pages=257–286}}</ref>

Citing fears of commercial advertising and lack of control in a perceived English-centric Wikipedia, users of the [[Spanish Wikipedia]] [[Fork (software development)|fork]]ed from Wikipedia to create the ''[[Enciclopedia Libre Universal en Español|Enciclopedia Libre]]'' in February 2002.<ref>{{cite web|title=<nowiki>[long] Enciclopedia Libre: msg#00008</nowiki> |url=http://osdir.com/ml/science.linguistics.wikipedia.international/2003-03/msg00008.html |work=Osdir |accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref> Later that year, Wales announced that Wikipedia would not display advertisements, and its website was moved to wikipedia.org.<ref name=Shirky>{{cite book|author= Clay Shirky|authorlink=Clay Shirky|title=Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations|date=February 28, 2008|publisher=The Penguin Press via Amazon Online Reader|url=http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1594201536/ref=sib_dp_srch_pop?v=search-inside&keywords=spanish&go.x=0&go.y=0&go=Go%21 |isbn=1-594201-53-6|page=273 |accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref> Various other projects have since forked from Wikipedia for editorial reasons. [[Wikinfo]] does not require a neutral point of view and allows original research. New Wikipedia-inspired projects&nbsp;– such as [[Citizendium]], [[Scholarpedia]], [[Conservapedia]], and Google's [[Knol]]<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7144970.stm BBC News]</ref>&nbsp;– have been started to address perceived limitations of Wikipedia, such as its policies on [[peer review]], [[original research]], and commercial [[advertising]].

[[File:Enwikipedialin.PNG|thumb|right|Number of articles in the English Wikipedia plotted against [[Logistic function|logistic curve]]s for 3, 3.5 and 4 million articles.]]
Though the English Wikipedia reached 3 million articles in August 2009, the growth of the edition, in terms of the numbers of articles and of contributors, appeared to have flattened off around early 2007.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/aug/12/wikipedia-deletionist-inclusionist |title=Wikipedia approaches its limits |author=Bobbie Johnson | work=The Guardian | location=London | date=2009-08-12 | accessdate=2010-03-31}}</ref> In July 2007, about 2,200 articles were added daily to the encyclopedia; {{asof|2009|8|lc=on}}, that average is 1,300. A team led by [[Ed H Chi]] at the [[Palo Alto Research Center]] speculated that this is due to the increasing exclusiveness of the project.<ref>{{cite conference |url=http://www.wikisym.org/ws2009/procfiles/p108-suh.pdf |title=The Singularity is Not Near: Slowing Growth of Wikipedia |year=2009|location=Orlando, Florida |conference=the International Symposium on Wikis}}</ref> New or occasional editors have significantly higher rates of their edits reverted (removed) than an elite group of regular editors, colloquially known as the "[[cabal]]". This could make it more difficult for the project to recruit and retain new contributors, over the long term resulting in stagnation in article creation. Others simply point out that the [[wikt:low-hanging fruit|low-hanging fruit]], the obvious articles like [[China]], already exist, and believe that the growth is flattening naturally.<ref>{{cite newspaper |url=http://www.bostonreview.net/BR34.6/morozov.php |title=Edit This Page; Is it the end of Wikipedia |publisher=Boston review |author=Evgeny Morozov}}</ref><ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/weekinreview/29cohen.html New York Times]</ref>

In November 2009, a Ph.D thesis written by Felipe Ortega, a researcher at the [[Universidad Rey Juan Carlos]] in Madrid, found that the English Wikipedia had lost 49,000 editors during the first three months of 2009; in comparison, the project lost only 4,900 editors during the same period in 2008.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/nov/26/wikipedia-losing-disgruntled-editors |title=Wikipedia falling victim to a war of words |publisher=Guardian |author=Jenny Kleeman | location=London | date=2009-11-26 | accessdate=2010-03-31}}</ref><ref>{{cite paper |url=http://libresoft.es/Members/jfelipe/thesis-wkp-quantanalysis |title=Wikipedia: A quantitative analysis |format=PDF}}</ref> ''The Wall Street Journal'' reported that "unprecedented numbers of the millions of online volunteers who write, edit and police [Wikipedia] are quitting." The array of rules applied to editing and disputes related to such content are among the reasons for this trend that are cited in the article.<ref>Volunteers Log Off as Wikipedia Ages, The Wall Street Journal, November 27, 2009.</ref> These claims were disputed by Jimmy Wales, who denied the decline and questioned the methodology of the study.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/6660646/Wikipedias-Jimmy-Wales-denies-site-is-losing-thousands-of-volunteer-editors.html |title=Wikipedia's Jimmy Wales denies site is 'losing' thousands of volunteer editors |publisher=Telegraph | location=London | date=2009-11-26 | accessdate=2010-03-31}}</ref>

==Nature of Wikipedia==
{{See also|Reliability of Wikipedia|Criticism of Wikipedia|Academic studies of Wikipedia}}
===Editing model===
[[File:Wiki feel stupid v2.ogv|thumb|In April 2009, the [[Wikimedia Foundation]] conducted a Wikipedia usability study, questioning users about the editing mechanism.<ref>[http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/UX_and_Usability_Study UX and Usability Study]</ref>]]
In departure from the style of traditional encyclopedias, Wikipedia consistently employs the open editing model called "wiki". Except for a few particularly vandalism-prone pages, every article may be edited anonymously or with a user account, while only registered users may create a new article (only in English edition). No article is owned by its creator or any other editor, or is vetted by any recognized authority; rather, the articles are collectively owned by a community of editors and are agreed on by {{srlink|WP:CONSENSUS|consensus}}.<ref>[[Wikipedia:Ownership of articles]]</ref>

Most importantly, when changes to an article are made, they become available immediately before undergoing any review, no matter if they contain an error, are somehow misguided, or even patent nonsense. The German edition of Wikipedia is an exception to this rule: it has been testing a system of maintaining "stable versions" of articles,<ref>{{cite mailing list|first=P. |last=Birken |url=http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikide-l/2008-December/021594.html |title=Bericht Gesichtete Versionen |mailinglist=Wikide-l |date=2008-12-14 |language=German |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation |accessdate=2009-02-15}}</ref> to allow a reader to see versions of articles that have passed certain reviews. The English edition of Wikipedia plans to trial a related approach.<ref>{{Cite web
| title = Wikimedia blog » Blog Archive » A quick update on Flagged Revisions
| accessdate = 2009-08-30
| url = http://blog.wikimedia.org/2009/08/26/a-quick-update-on-flagged-revisions/
}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web
| title = Wikipedia:Flagged protection and patrolled revisions&nbsp;– Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| accessdate = 2009-08-25
| url = http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Flagged_protection_and_patrolled_revisions#cite_ref-7
}}</ref>

[[File:History comparison example.png|thumb|left|alt=Web page showing side-by-side comparison of an article highlighting changed paragraphs.|[[Editor]]s keep track of changes to articles by checking the difference between two revisions of a page, displayed here in red.]]
Contributors, registered or not, can take advantage of features available in the software that powers Wikipedia. The "History" page attached to each article records every single past revision of the article, though a revision with libelous content, criminal threats or copyright infringements may be removed afterwards.<ref name="Torsten_Kleinz"/><ref>The [[Japanese Wikipedia]], for example, is known for deleting every mention of real names of victims of certain high-profile crimes, even though they may still be noted in other language editions.</ref> This feature makes it easy to compare old and new versions, undo changes that an editor considers undesirable, or restore lost content. The "Discussion" pages associated with each article are used to coordinate work among multiple editors.<ref>{{cite journal |url=http://www.research.ibm.com/visual/papers/wikipedia_coordination_final.pdf
|format=PDF|author=Fernanda B. Viégas, Martin Wattenberg, Jesse Kriss, Frank van Ham
|title=Talk Before You Type: Coordination in Wikipedia
|publisher=Visual Communication Lab, IBM Research
|date=2007-01-03|accessdate=2008-06-27}}</ref> Regular contributors often maintain a "watchlist" of articles of interest to them, so that they can easily keep tabs on all recent changes to those articles. Computer programs called [[Internet bot]]s have been used widely to remove vandalism as soon as it was made,<ref name="CreatingDestroyingAndRestoringValue" /> to correct common misspellings and stylistic issues, or to start articles such as geography entries in a standard format from statistical data.<!-- In a time of content dispute, a page sometimes get locked for further edit until editors can work out differences.-->

[[File:Wikipedia editing interface.png|thumb|right|The editing interface of Wikipedia.]]
Articles in Wikipedia are organized roughly in three ways according to: development status, subject matter and the access level required for editing. The most developed state of articles is called "featured article": they are precisely ones that someday get featured in the main page of Wikipedia.<ref>[http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2365/2182 First Monday]</ref><ref>{{cite journal
|url=http://www.research.ibm.com/visual/papers/hidden_order_wikipedia.pdf
|author=Fernanda B. Viégas, Martin Wattenberg, and Matthew M. McKeon
|title=The Hidden Order of Wikipedia
|publisher=Visual Communication Lab, IBM Research
|date=2007-07-22
|format=PDF
|accessdate=2007-10-30}}</ref> Researcher Giacomo Poderi found that articles tend to reach the FA status via intensive works of few editors. In 2007, in preparation for producing a print version, the English-language Wikipedia introduced an assessment scale against which the quality of articles is judged;<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment
|title=Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment
|accessdate=2007-10-28}}</ref> other editions have also adopted this.{{Clarify|date=March 2010}}

A WikiProject is a place for a group of editors to coordinate works on a specific topic. The discussion pages attached to a project are often used to coordinate changes that take place across articles. Wikipedia also maintains a style guide called the [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style|Manual of Style]] or MoS for short, which stipulates, for example, cases in which an article must start with the article title in bold in the first sentence.

In 2008, two researchers theorized that the growth of Wikipedia is sustainable.<ref name="spinellis">[[Diomidis Spinellis]] and Panagiotis Louridas (2008): [http://www.dmst.aueb.gr/dds/pubs/jrnl/2008-CACM-Wikipedia/html/SL08.pdf The collaborative organization of knowledge]. In [[Communications of the ACM]], August 2008, Vol 51, No 8, Pages 68–73. DOI:10.1145/1378704.1378720. Quote: "Most new articles are created shortly after a corresponding reference to them is entered into the system". See also: [[Wikipedia:Inflationary hypothesis of Wikipedia growth|Inflationary hypothesis of Wikipedia growth]]</ref>

===Rules and laws governing content===

For legal reasons, content in Wikipedia is subject to the laws (in particular [[copyright|copyright law]]) of [[Florida]], where Wikipedia servers are hosted. Beyond that, the Wikipedian editorial principles in the form of {{srlink|WP:5P|5 pillars}}, and numerous {{srlink|Wikipedia:List of policies and guidelines|policies and guidelines}} are intended to shape the content appropriately. Even these rules are stored in wiki form, and Wikipedia editors as a community write and revise those policies and guidelines<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index.php/id;1866322157;fp;2;fpid;2 |title=Who's behind Wikipedia?|publisher=PC World |date=2008-02-06 |accessdate=2008-02-07}}</ref> and enforce them by deleting, annotating with tags, or modifying article materials failing to meet them. The rules on the non English editions of the Wikipedia branched off a translation of the rules on the English Wikipedia and have since diverged to some extent. While they still show broad-brush similarities, they differ in many details.

According to the rules on the English Wikipedia, each entry in Wikipedia to be worthy of inclusion must be about a topic that is [[wiktionary:encyclopedic|encyclopedic]] and is not a [[dictionary]] entry or dictionary-like.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:ISNOT |title=Wikipedia:ISNOT |accessdate=2010-04-01 |quote=Wikipedia is not a dictionary, usage, or jargon guide.}}</ref> A topic should also be "[[Notability in Wikipedia|notable]]"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability |title=Wikipedia:Notability |accessdate=2008-02-13 |quote=A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.}}</ref> in the Wikipedia jargon; i.e. it has received significant coverage in secondary reliable sources such as mainstream media or major academic journals that are independent of the subject of the topic. Further, Wikipedia must expose knowledge that is already established and recognized.<ref name=NOR>{{cite web |url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research |title=Wikipedia:No original research |accessdate=2008-02-13|quote=Wikipedia does not publish original thought}}</ref> In other words, it must not present, for instance, new information or original works. A claim that is likely to be challenged requires a reference to a reliable source. Among Wikipedia editors, this is often phrased as "verifiability, not truth" to express the idea that the readers, not the encyclopedia, are ultimately responsible for checking the truthfulness of the articles and making their own interpretations.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability |title= Wikipedia:Verifiability |accessdate=2008-02-13 |quote=Material challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, must be attributed to a reliable, published source.}}</ref> Finally, Wikipedia must not take a side.<ref name=autogenerated2>{{cite web |url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view|title=Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view|accessdate=2008-02-13 |quote=All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing significant views fairly, proportionately and without bias.}}</ref> All opinions and viewpoints, if attributable to external sources, must enjoy appropriate share of coverage within an article.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.alternet.org/story/61365/?page=entire
|title=Will Unethical Editing Destroy Wikipedia's Credibility?
|author=Eric Haas
|publisher=AlterNet.org
|date=2007-10-26
|accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref> This is known as neutral point of view, or NPOV.

===Defenses against undesirable edits===
The open nature of the editing model has been central to most criticism of Wikipedia. For example, a reader of an article cannot be certain that it has not been compromised by the insertion of false information or the removal of essential information.<!-- eventually we have to merge this sentence with a paragraph on vandalism below. --> Former ''Encyclopædia Britannica'' editor-in-chief [[Robert McHenry]] once described this by saying:<ref>[http://www.caslon.com.au/wikiprofile1.htm Caslon.com]</ref>
{{quote|The user who visits Wikipedia to learn about some subject, to confirm some matter of fact, is rather in the position of a visitor to a public restroom. It may be obviously dirty, so that he knows to exercise great care, or it may seem fairly clean, so that he may be lulled into a false sense of security. What he certainly does not know is who has used the facilities before him. Wikipedia [is a] faith-based encyclopedia.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=111504A
|title= The Faith-Based Encyclopedia
|publisher=TCS Daily
|author=Robert McHenry
|date=2004-11-15
|accessdate=2009-09-10}}</ref>}}

[[File:John Seigenthaler Sr. speaking.jpg|thumb|alt=White-haired elderly gentleman in suit and tie speaks at a podium.|[[John Seigenthaler]] has described Wikipedia as "a flawed and irresponsible research tool."<ref name="Seigenthaler" />]]
Obvious vandalism is easy to remove from wiki articles, since the previous versions of each article are kept. In practice, the median time to detect and fix vandalisms is very low, usually a few minutes,<ref name="MIT_IBM_study"/><ref name="CreatingDestroyingAndRestoringValue"/> but in one particularly well-publicized [[Seigenthaler incident|incident]], false information was introduced into the biography of American political figure [[John Seigenthaler]] and remained undetected for four months.<ref name="Seigenthaler">{{cite news
|url=http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-11-29-wikipedia-edit_x.htm
|last=Seigenthaler
|first=John
|title=A False Wikipedia 'biography'
|date=2005-11-29
|publisher=USA Today
|accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref> John Seigenthaler, the founding editorial director of ''[[USA Today]]'' and founder of the Freedom Forum First Amendment Center at [[Vanderbilt University]], called Jimmy Wales and asked if Wales had any way of knowing who contributed the misinformation. Wales replied that he did not.<ref>Thomas L. Friedman ''The World is Flat'', p. 124, Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 2007 ISBN 978-0-374-29278-2</ref> This incident led to policy changes on the site, specifically targeted at tightening up the verifiability of all {{srlink|WP:BLP|biographical articles of living people}}.

Wikipedia's open structure inherently makes it an easy target for Internet [[troll (Internet)|trolls]], [[Spam (electronic)|spamming]], and those with an agenda to push.<ref name="Torsten_Kleinz">{{cite news
|first=Torsten
|last=Kleinz
|title=World of Knowledge
|work =The Wikipedia Project
|url=http://w3.linux-magazine.com/issue/51/Wikipedia_Encyclopedia.pdf
|format=PDF
|publisher=Linux Magazine
|date=February, 2005
|accessdate=2007-07-13
|quote= The Wikipedia's open structure makes it a target for trolls and vandals who malevolently add incorrect information to articles, get other people tied up in endless discussions, and generally do everything to draw attention to themselves.}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
|title=Toward a New Compendium of Knowledge (longer version)
|url=http://www.citizendium.org/essay.html
|work=Citizendium.org
|accessdate=2006-10-10
}}</ref> The addition of political [[Spin (public relations)|spin]] to articles by organizations including members of the [[United States House of Representatives|U.S. House of Representatives]] and special interest groups<ref name="DeathByWikipedia">{{cite web
|title=Death by Wikipedia: The Kenneth Lay Chronicles
|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/08/AR2006070800135.html
|first=Frank
|last=Ahrens
|publisher=The Washington Post
|date=2006-07-09
|accessdate=2006-11-01}}</ref> has been noted,<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-6032713-7.html
|title=Politicians notice Wikipedia
|publisher=CNET
|author=Kane, Margaret
|date=2006-01-30
|accessdate=2007-01-28
}}</ref> and organizations such as [[Microsoft]] have offered financial incentives to work on certain articles.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16775981/
|title=Microsoft offers cash for Wikipedia edit
|publisher=MSNBC
|author=Bergstein, Brian
|authorlink=Brian Bergstein
|date=2007-01-23
|accessdate=2007-02-01
}}</ref> These issues have been parodied, notably by [[Stephen Colbert]] in ''[[The Colbert Report]]''.<ref name="wikiality">{{cite news
|title=Wikiality
|publisher=Comedycentral.com
|url=http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/72347/july-31-2006/the-word---wikiality
|author=Stephen Colbert
|date=2006-07-30
|accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref>

For example, in August 2007, the website [[WikiScanner]] began to trace the sources of changes made to Wikipedia by anonymous editors without Wikipedia accounts. The program revealed that many such edits were made by corporations or government agencies changing the content of articles related to them, their personnel or their work.<ref name="Seeing Corporate Fingerprints">{{cite news
|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/19/technology/19wikipedia.html
|title=Seeing Corporate Fingerprints From the Editing of Wikipedia
|first=Katie
|last=Hafner
|date=2007-08-19
|publisher=New York Times
|accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref><!-- Wales called WikiScanner "a very clever idea", and said that he was considering some changes to Wikipedia to help visitors better understand what information is recorded about them. "When someone clicks on 'edit,' it would be interesting if we could say, 'Hi, thank you for editing. We see you're logged in from ''[[The New York Times]]''. Keep in mind that we know that, and it's public information'", he said. "That might make them stop and think."<ref name="Seeing Corporate Fingerprints"/>-->

In practice, the Wikipedia is defended from attack by multiple systems and techniques. These include users checking pages and edits, computer programs ('bots') that are carefully designed to try to detect attacks and fix them automatically (or semi-automatically), filters that warn users making undesirable edits,<ref>[http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-03-23/Abuse_Filter Wikipedia signpost: Abuse Filter is enabled]</ref> blocks on the creation of links to particular websites, blocks on edits from particular accounts, IP addresses or address ranges.

For heavily attacked pages, particular articles can be ''semi-protected'' so that only well established accounts can edit them,<ref>[[Protection_policy#Semi-protection|English Wikipedia's semi-protection policy]]</ref> or for particularly contentious cases, locked so that only administrators are able to make changes.<ref>[[Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Full_protection|English Wikipedia's full protection policy]]</ref> Such locking is applied sparingly, usually for only short periods of time while attacks continue.

===Coverage of topics===
{| class="wikitable" style="margin: 0 0 1em 1em; float: right; border-collapse: collapse;"
|+ The Top 20 most viewed Wikipedia articles in 2009<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/6043534/The-50-most-viewed-Wikipedia-articles-in-2009-and-2008.html |title=The 50 most-viewed Wikipedia articles in 2009 and 2008 |publisher=The Daily Telegraph |date=2009-08-17 | location=London | accessdate=2010-03-31}}</ref>
|-
|[[Wiki|1. Wiki]]
|-
|[[The Beatles|2. The Beatles]]
|-
|[[Michael Jackson|3. Michael Jackson]]
|-
|[[Favicon|4. Favicon]]
|-
|[[Youtube|5. YouTube]]
|-
|'''6. Wikipedia'''
|-
|[[Barack Obama|7. Barack Obama]]
|-
|[[Deaths in 2009|8. Deaths in 2009]]
|-
|[[United States|9. United States]]
|-
|[[Facebook|10. Facebook]]
|-
|[[Portal:Current events|11. Current events portal]]
|-
|[[World War II|12. World War II]]
|-
|[[Twitter|13. Twitter]]
|-
|[[Transformers (film)|14. Transformers]]
|-
|[[Slumdog Millionaire|15. Slumdog Millionaire]]
|-
|[[Lil Wayne|16. Lil Wayne]]
|-
|[[Adolf Hitler|17. Adolf Hitler]]
|-
|[[India|18. India]]
|-
|[[Transformers 2|19. Transformers 2]]
|-
|[[Scrubs (TV series)|20. Scrubs]]
|}

{{See also|Notability in Wikipedia}}

Wikipedia seeks to create a summary of all human knowledge in the form of an online encyclopedia. Since it has virtually unlimited disk space it can have far more topics than can be covered by any conventional print encyclopedias.<ref>[[Wikipedia:PAPER]]</ref> It also contains materials that some people, including Wikipedia editors,<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,25642,24318423-5014239,00.html |title=Wikipedia users divided over sexual material |date=2008-09-09 |last=Schliebs |first=Mark |publisher=news.com.au |accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref> may find objectionable, offensive, or pornographic.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_censored |title=Wikipedia is not censored |publisher=Wikipedia |accessdate=2008-04-30}}</ref> It was made clear that this policy is not up for debate, and the policy has sometimes proved controversial. For instance, in 2008, Wikipedia rejected an online petition against the inclusion of [[Depictions of Muhammad#Wikipedia article|Muhammad's depictions]] in its [[English Wikipedia|English edition]], citing this policy. The presence of politically sensitive materials in Wikipedia had also led the People's Republic of China to [[Blocking of Wikipedia in mainland China|block access]] to parts of the site.<ref name=Taylor>{{cite web|url=http://in.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idINIndia-32865420080405|title=China allows access to English Wikipedia|work=Reuters|author=Sophie Taylor|date=2008-04-05|accessdate=2008-07-29}}</ref> (See also: [[Internet Watch Foundation and Wikipedia|IWF block of Wikipedia]])

{{asof|2009|9}}, Wikipedia articles cover about half a million places on Earth. However, research conducted by the Oxford Internet Institute has shown that the geographic distribution of articles is highly uneven. Most articles are written about North America, Europe, and East Asia, with very little coverage of large parts of the developing world, including most of Africa.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://zerogeography.blogspot.com/2009/11/mapping-geographies-of-wikipedia.html |title=Mapping the Geographies of Wikipedia Content |work=Mark Graham Oxford Internet Institute|publisher=ZeroGeography |accessdate=2009-11-16}}</ref>

[[File:Wikipedia content by subject.png|thumb|300px|Pie chart of Wikipedia content by subject as of January 2008.<ref name=Kittur2009/>]]
A 2008 study conducted by researchers at Carnegie-Mellon University and Palo Alto Research Center gave a distribution of topics as well as growth (from July 2006 to January 2008) in each field:<ref name=Kittur2009>Kittur, A., Chi, E. H., and Suh, B. 2009. [http://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~echi/papers/2009-CHI2009/p1509.pdf What’s in Wikipedia? Mapping Topics and Conflict Using Socially Annotated Category Structure] In Proceedings of the 27th international Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Boston, MA, USA, April 04 – 09, 2009). CHI '09. ACM, New York, NY, 1509–1512.</ref>

*Culture and the arts 30% (210%)
*Biographies and persons: 15% (97%)
*Geography and places: 14% (52%)
*Society and social sciences: 12% (83%)
*History and events: 11% (143%)
*Natural and the physical sciences: 9% (213%)
*Technology and the applied science: 4% (−6%)
*Religions and belief systems: 2% (38%)
*Health: 2% (42%)
*Mathematics and logic: 1% (146%)
*Thought and philosophy: 1% (160%)

However, the exact coverage of the Wikipedia is under constant review by the editors, and disagreements are not uncommon (see also [[deletionism and inclusionism in Wikipedia|deletionism and inclusionism]]).<ref>{{cite news |title=The battle for Wikipedia's soul |url=http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10789354 |publisher=[[The Economist]]|date=2008-03-06 |accessdate=2008-03-07 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connemoved down deletionist/creationsistcted/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2007/10/11/dlwiki11.xml |title=Wikipedia: an online encyclopedia torn apart |date=2007-11-10 |publisher=Daily Telegraph |accessdate=2008-03-11 | location=London | first=Ian | last=Douglas}}</ref>

===Quality===
Because contributors usually rewrite small portions of an entry rather than making full-length revisions, high- and low-quality content may be intermingled within an entry. Critics sometimes argue that non-expert editing undermines quality, for example historian [[Roy Rosenzweig]] claimed that: "Overall, writing is the [[Achilles' heel]] of Wikipedia. Committees rarely write well, and Wikipedia entries often have a choppy quality that results from the stringing together of sentences or paragraphs written by different people."<ref name=Rosenzweig>{{cite web
|url=http://chnm.gmu.edu/resources/essays/d/42
|title=Can History be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past
|publisher=[[The Journal of American History]] Volume 93, Number 1 (June, 2006): 117–46
|author=Roy Rosenzweig
|accessdate=2007-10-29
}}</ref>

===Reliability===
{{Main|Reliability of Wikipedia}}
As a consequence of the open structure, Wikipedia "makes no guarantee of validity" of its content, since no one is ultimately responsible for any claims appearing in it.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:General_disclaimer |title=Wikipedia:General disclaimer |publisher=English Wikipedia |accessdate=2008-04-22}}</ref> Concerns have been raised regarding the lack of [[accountability]] that results from users' anonymity,<ref name="WikipediaWatch">{{cite web |title=Public Information Research |publisher=Wikipedia Watch |accessdate=2007-01-28}}{{Citation broken|date=November 2009}}</ref> the insertion of spurious information<ref>{{cite web |last=Raphel |first=JR |url=http://www.pcworld.com/article/170874/the_15_biggest_wikipedia_blunders.html |title=The 15 Biggest Wikipedia Blunders |publisher=[[PC World (magazine)|PC World]] |accessdate=2009-09-02}}</ref>, [[vandalism]], and similar problems.

Wikipedia has been accused of exhibiting [[systemic bias]] and inconsistency;<ref name="Who" /> additionally, critics argue that Wikipedia's open nature and a lack of proper sources for much of the information makes it unreliable.<ref>{{cite news|author=Stacy Schiff | date = 2006-07-31 | title = Know It All | work = The New Yorker}}</ref> Some commentators suggest that Wikipedia is generally reliable, but that the reliability of any given article is not always clear.<ref name="AcademiaAndWikipedia" /> Editors of traditional [[reference work]]s such as the ''[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]'' have questioned the project's utility and status as an encyclopedia.<ref name="McHenry_2004">[[Robert McHenry]], "[http://www.techcentralstation.com/111504A.html The Faith-Based Encyclopedia]", [[TCS Daily|Tech Central Station]], November 15, 2004.</ref> Many [[university]] [[lecturer]]s discourage students from citing any encyclopedia in [[Academia|academic work]], preferring [[primary source]]s;<ref name="WideWorldOfWikipedia">{{cite web | title = Wide World of Wikipedia | publisher = The Emory Wheel | url = http://www.emorywheel.com/detail.php?n=17902 | date = April 21, 2006 | accessdate = 2007-10-17 }}</ref> some specifically prohibit Wikipedia citations.<ref>{{cite news |first=Scott |last=Jaschik |title=A Stand Against Wikipedia |url=http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki |publisher=Inside Higher Ed |date=2007-01-26 |accessdate=2007-01-27 }}</ref> Co-founder [[Jimmy Wales]] stresses that encyclopedias of any type are not usually appropriate as primary sources, and should not be relied upon as authoritative.<ref name="AWorkInProgress">{{cite news |first=Burt |last=Helm |title= Wikipedia: "A Work in Progress" |url= http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/dec2005/tc20051214_441708.htm |publisher=BusinessWeek |date=2005-12-14 |accessdate=2007-01-29 }}</ref>

However, an investigation reported in the journal [[Nature (journal)|Nature]] in 2005 suggested that for scientific articles Wikipedia came close to the level of accuracy of ''[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]'' and had a similar rate of "serious errors."<ref name="GilesJ2005Internet">{{Cite journal
| author = [[Jim Giles (reporter)|Jim Giles]]
| title = Internet encyclopedias go head to head
| journal = [[Nature (journal)|Nature]]
| volume = 438
| pages = 900–901
| month = December
| year = 2005
| url = http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7070/full/438900a.html
| doi = 10.1038/438900a
}}
The study (that was not in itself peer reviewed) was cited in several news articles, e.g.,
* {{cite news
| title=Wikipedia survives research test
| date=December 15, 2005
| work=[[BBC News]]
| publisher=[[British Broadcasting Corporation|BBC]]
| url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4530930.stm
}}
</ref> These claims have been disputed by ''Encyclopædia Britannica''.<ref name="corporate.britannica.com">[http://corporate.britannica.com/britannica_nature_response.pdf Fatally Flawed: Refuting the recent study on encyclopedic accuracy by the journal Nature] Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., March 2006</ref><ref>[http://www.nature.com/press_releases/Britannica_response.pdf?item Encyclopaedia Britannica and Nature: a response]</ref>

Economist [[Tyler Cowen]] writes, "If I had to guess whether Wikipedia or the median refereed journal article on economics was more likely to be true, after a not so long think I would opt for Wikipedia." He comments that many traditional sources of non-fiction suffer from systemic biases. Novel results are over-reported in journal articles, and relevant information is omitted from news reports. However, he also cautions that errors are frequently found on Internet sites, and that academics and experts must be vigilant in correcting them.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.tnr.com/story.html?id=82eb5d70-13bd-4086-9ec0-cb0e9e8411b3
|title=Cooked Books
|author=Tyler Cowen
|publisher=The New Republic
|date=2008-03-14
|accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref>

In February 2007, an article in ''[[The Harvard Crimson]]'' newspaper reported that some of the professors at [[Harvard University]] include Wikipedia in their [[syllabus|syllabi]], but that there is a split in their perception of using Wikipedia.<ref>Child, Maxwell L.,[http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=517305 "Professors Split on Wiki Debate"], The Harvard Crimson, Monday, February 26, 2007.</ref> In June 2007, former president of the [[American Library Association]] [[Michael Gorman (librarian)|Michael Gorman]] condemned Wikipedia, along with [[Google]],<ref name="stothart">Chloe Stothart, [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=209408 Web threatens learning ethos],
''The Times Higher Education Supplement'', 2007, 1799 (June 22), page 2</ref> stating that academics who endorse the use of Wikipedia are "the intellectual equivalent of a [[dietitian]] who recommends a steady diet of [[Big Mac]]s with everything". He also said that "a generation of intellectual sluggards incapable of moving beyond the Internet" was being produced at universities. He complains that the web-based sources are discouraging students from learning from the more rare texts which are either found only on paper or are on subscription-only web sites. In the same article Jenny Fry (a research fellow at the [[Oxford Internet Institute]]) commented on academics who cite Wikipedia, saying that: "You cannot say children are intellectually lazy because they are using the Internet when academics are using search engines in their research. The difference is that they have more experience of being critical about what is retrieved and whether it is authoritative. Children need to be told how to use the Internet in a critical and appropriate way."<ref name="stothart" />
<!--
Speaking at a conference in Pennsylvania, Wales said he receives about ten e-mails weekly from students saying they got failing grades on papers because they cited Wikipedia. According to ''[[The Sunday Times]]'' of London, Wales told the students they got what they deserved. "For God's sake, you're in college; don't cite the encyclopedia," he said.<ref>"Jimmy Wales," ''Biography Resource Center Online''. (Gale, 2006)</ref>

So what? First we need some paragraph discussing the reliance of Wikipedia in school. – Taku
-->

===Community===
[[File:WIkimania-2006 010.jpg|thumb|right|[[Wikimania]], an annual conference for users of Wikipedia and other projects operated by the Wikimedia Foundation.]]
The Wikipedia community has established "a bureaucracy of sorts", including "a clear power structure that gives volunteer administrators the authority to exercise editorial control."<ref name="NYTimesJune17-2006">
{{cite news
|first=Kate
|last=Hafner
|title=Growing Wikipedia Refines Its 'Anyone Can Edit' Policy
|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/17/technology/17wiki.html?scp=8&sq=wikipedia&st=cse
|publisher=New York Times
|date=June 17, 2006
|accessdate=2009-07-12}}</ref><ref name="iTWireJune18-2006">
{{cite news
|first=Stuart
|last=Corner
|title=What's all the fuss about Wikipedia?
|url=http://www.itwire.com/content/view/4666/127/
|publisher=iT Wire
|date=June 18, 2006
|accessdate=2007-03-25}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.slate.com/id/2184487 |title=The Wisdom of the Chaperones |date=2008-02-22 |first=Chris |last=Wilson |publisher=Slate |accessdate=2008-03-04}}</ref>
Wikipedia's community has also been described as "[[cult|cult-like]]",<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2005/dec/15/wikipedia.web20
|title=Log on and join in, but beware the web cults
|first=Charles |last=Arthur
|date=2005-12-15
|publisher= Guardian
|accessdate=2008-12-26 | location=London}}</ref> although not always with entirely negative connotations,<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/08/03/wikipedia/index.html
|title=Wikipedia: The know-it-all Web site
|date=2003-08-04
|first=Kristie
|last=Lu Stout|publisher=CNN
|accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref> and criticized for failing to accommodate inexperienced users.<ref>"{{cite web
|url=http://wikinfo.org/index.php/Critical_views_of_Wikipedia
|title=Critical views of Wikipedia
|author=Wikinfo
|date=2005-03-30
|accessdate=2007-01-29
}}</ref><!--While they are welcomed by the community,<ref name="TheNewYorker">
{{cite news
|first=Stacy
|last=Schiff
|title=Can Wikipedia conquer expertise?
|work =Know It All
|url=http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/07/31/060731fa_fact
|publisher =The New Yorker
|date =July 24, 2006
|accessdate=2007-03-25}}</ref> authors new to Wikipedia are encouraged to read policies to help them learn the ways of Wikipedia.<ref name="Torsten_Kleinz" />--> Editors in good standing in the community can run for one of many levels of volunteer stewardship; this begins with "administrator",<ref>{{srlink|Wikipedia:Administrators}}</ref><ref name="David_Mehegan">{{cite news
|first=David
|last=Mehegan
|title=Many contributors, common cause
|url=http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2006/02/13/many_contributors_common_cause/
|publisher=The Boston Globe
|date=February 13, 2006
|accessdate=2007-03-25}}</ref> a group of privileged users who have the ability to delete pages, lock articles from being changed in case of vandalism or editorial disputes, and block users from editing. Despite the name, administrators do not enjoy any special privilege in decision-making; instead they are mostly limited to making edits that have project-wide effects and thus are disallowed to ordinary editors, and to block users making disruptive edits (such as vandalism).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators#Administrator_conduct |title=Wikipedia:Administrators |accessdate=2009-07-12}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:RfA_Review/Reflect |title=Wikipedia:RfA_Review/Reflect |accessdate=2009-09-24}}</ref><!--From the beginning, the role of founder Jimmy Wales, within the Wikipedia community, has been unclear, while co-founder Larry Sanger in the early days had served as an editor-in-chief. -->

[[File:WMFstratplanSurvey1.png|thumb|right|Demography of Wikipedia editors.]]
As Wikipedia grows with an unconventional model of encyclopedia building, "Who writes Wikipedia?" has become one of the questions frequently asked on the project, often with a reference to other Web 2.0 projects such as [[Digg]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.viktoria.se/altchi/submissions/submission_edchi_1.pdf |title=Power of the Few vs. Wisdom of the Crowd: Wikipedia and the Rise of the Bourgeoisie |first=Aniket |last=Kittur |format=PDF | accessdate =2008-02-23}}</ref> Jimmy Wales once argued that only "a community&nbsp;... a dedicated group of a few hundred volunteers" makes the bulk of contributions to Wikipedia and that the project is therefore "much like any traditional organization". Wales performed a study finding that over 50% of all the edits are done by just 0.7% of the users (at the time: 524 people). This method of evaluating contributions was later disputed by [[Aaron Swartz]], who noted that several articles he sampled had large portions of their content (measured by number of characters) contributed by users with low edit counts.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whowriteswikipedia |title=Raw Thought: Who Writes Wikipedia? |first=Aaron |last=Swartz |date=2006-09-04 |accessdate=2008-02-23}}</ref> A 2007 study by researchers from [[Dartmouth College]] found that "anonymous and infrequent contributors to Wikipedia ... are as reliable a source of knowledge as those contributors who register with the site."<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=good-samaritans-are-on-the-money
|title=Wikipedia "Good Samaritans'' Are on the Money
|publisher=Scientific American
|date=2007-10-19
|accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref>
Although some contributors are authorities in their field, Wikipedia requires that even their contributions be supported by published and verifiable sources. The project's preference for {{srlink|WP:CONSENSUS|consensus}} over [[credential]]s has been labeled "[[elitism#Anti-elitism|anti-elitism]]".<ref name="SangerElitism">[[Larry Sanger]], [http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/12/30/142458/25 Why Wikipedia Must Jettison Its Anti-Elitism], [[Kuro5hin]], December 31, 2004.</ref>

In a 2003 study of Wikipedia as a community, economics [[Doctor of Philosophy|Ph.D.]] student Andrea Ciffolilli argued that the low [[transaction cost]]s of participating in [[wiki]] software create a catalyst for collaborative development, and that a "creative construction" approach encourages participation.<ref>
Andrea Ciffolilli, "[http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_12/ciffolilli/index.html Phantom authority, self-selective recruitment and retention of members in virtual communities: The case of Wikipedia]", ''[[First Monday (journal)|First Monday]]'' December 2003.
</ref> In his 2008 book, ''The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It'', [[Jonathan Zittrain]] of the [[Oxford Internet Institute]] and Harvard Law School’s [[Berkman Center for Internet & Society]] cites Wikipedia's success as a case study in how open collaboration has fostered innovation on the web.<ref>{{cite book
| last = Zittrain
| first = Jonathan
|title = The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It&nbsp;— Chapter 6: The Lessons of Wikipedia
| author-link = Jonathan Zittrain
| publisher = Yale University Press
| year = 2008
| url = http://yupnet.org/zittrain/archives/16
| isbn = 978-0300124873
| accessdate = 2008-12-26}}</ref> A 2008 study found that Wikipedia users were less agreeable and open, though more conscientious, than non-Wikipedia users.<ref>Yair Amichai–Hamburger, Naama Lamdan, Rinat Madiel, Tsahi Hayat [http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/cpb.2007.0225 Personality Characteristics of Wikipedia Members] ''CyberPsychology & Behavior'' December 1, 2008, 11(6): 679–681. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0225</ref><ref>[http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126883.900-wikipedians-are-closed-and-disagreeable.html Wikipedians are 'closed' and 'disagreeable']</ref> A 2009 study suggested there was "evidence of growing resistance from the Wikipedia community to new content."<ref>Jim Giles [http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17554-after-the-boom-is-wikipedia-heading-for-bust.html After the boom, is Wikipedia heading for bust?] ''New Scientist'' 04 August 2009</ref>

At [[OOPSLA]] 2009, [[Wikimedia]] CTO and Senior Software Architect gave a presentation entitled "Community Performance Optimization: Making Your People Run as Smoothly as Your Site"<ref>[http://www.infoq.com/presentations/vibber-community-perf-opt Infoq.com]</ref> in which he discussed the challenges of handling the contributions from a large community and compared the process to that of software development.

''The Wikipedia Signpost'' is the community newspaper on the [[English Wikipedia]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost|title=''The Wikipedia Signpost''|accessdate=2009-03-24|publisher=Wikipedia}}</ref> and was founded by [[Michael Snow (attorney)|Michael Snow]], an administrator and the current chair of the [[Wikimedia Foundation]] board of trustees.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/05/technology/05wikipedia.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1 |title=A Contributor to Wikipedia Has His Fictional Side |date=2007-03-05 |first=Noam |last=Cohen |work=[[The New York Times]] |accessdate=2008-10-18}}</ref> It covers news and events from the site, as well as major events from sister projects, such as [[Wikimedia Commons]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.webpronews.com/blogtalk/2005/12/19/ten-more-wikipedia-hacks |title=Ten More Wikipedia Hacks |date=2005-12-19 |first=Steve |last=Rubel |work=WebProNews |accessdate=2008-10-18}}</ref>

Notable users of Wikipedia include [[film critic]] [[Roger Ebert]]<ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=-U3y_SgnQ6kC&pg=PA529&lpg=PA529&dq=Roger+Ebert,+%22according+to+Wikipedia%22&source=bl&ots=Ir48y1qiBa&sig=RpFKMr24CxqXhXX4lfTdQv2wzQE&hl=en&ei=5GiZSs-SKZmf8Qax-9GjBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6#v=onepage&q=&f=false Ebert, Roger. ''Roger Ebert's Movie Yearbook 2009'' Page 529]</ref><ref>[http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091007/REVIEWS/910079997 Ebert, Roger. Review of ''[[Good Hair]]''; rogerebert.suntimes.com October 7, 2009]</ref> and [[University of Maryland]] [[physicist]] [[Robert L. Park]].<ref>[http://bobpark.physics.umd.edu/WN09/wn082809.html Bob Park. "What's New" bobpark.org; August 28, 2009]</ref>

Wikipedians sometimes award one another [[barnstar]]s for outstanding work. These personalized tokens of appreciation reveal a wide range of valued work extending far beyond simple editing to include social support, administrative actions, and types of articulation work. The barnstar phenomenon has been analyzed by researchers seeking to determine what implications it might have for other communities engaged in large-scale collaborations.<ref>{{citation|title=Articulations of wikiwork: uncovering valued work in wikipedia through barnstars|url=http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1460563.1460573|publisher=Proceedings of the ACM|author=T Kriplean, I Beschastnikh, et al|date=2008}}</ref>

==Operation==
===Wikimedia Foundation and the Wikimedia chapters===
[[File:Wikimedia Foundation RGB logo with text.svg|thumb|150px|[[Wikimedia Foundation]] logo.]]
Wikipedia is hosted and funded by the [[Wikimedia Foundation]], a non-profit organization which also operates Wikipedia-related projects such as [[Wiktionary]] and [[Wikibooks]]. The Wikimedia chapters, local associations of users and supporters of the Wikimedia projects, also participate in the promotion, the development, and the funding of the project.

===Software and hardware===
The operation of Wikipedia depends on [[MediaWiki]], a custom-made, [[free software|free]] and [[open source software|open source]] [[wiki software]] platform written in [[PHP]] and built upon the [[MySQL]] database.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nedworks.org/~mark/presentations/san/Wikimedia%20architecture.pdf |format=PDF|title=Wikimedia Architecture |author=Mark Bergman |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation Inc. |accessdate=2008-06-27}}</ref> The software incorporates programming features such as a [[Macro (computer science)|macro language]], [[variable (programming)|variables]], a [[transclusion]] system for [[Web template|templates]], and [[URL redirection]]. MediaWiki is licensed under the [[GNU General Public License]] and it is used by all Wikimedia projects, as well as many other wiki projects. Originally, Wikipedia ran on [[UseModWiki]] written in [[Perl]] by Clifford Adams (Phase I), which initially required [[CamelCase]] for article hyperlinks; the present double bracket style was incorporated later. Starting in January 2002 (Phase II), Wikipedia began running on a [[PhpWiki|PHP wiki]] engine with a MySQL database; this software was custom-made for Wikipedia by Magnus Manske. The Phase II software was repeatedly modified to accommodate the [[Exponential growth|exponentially increasing]] demand. In July 2002 (Phase III), Wikipedia shifted to the third-generation software, MediaWiki, originally written by [[Lee Daniel Crocker]].
Several MediaWiki extensions are installed<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:Version#Installed_extensions
|title=Version: Installed extensions}}</ref> to extend the functionality of MediaWiki software.
In April 2005 a [[Lucene]] extension<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2005-04-18/Lucene_search
|title=Lucene search: Internal search function returns to service
|publisher=Wikimedia Foundation Inc.|author=Michael Snow|accessdate=2009-02-26}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
|url=http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2005-April/016297.html
|title=[Wikitech-l&#93; Lucene search|author=Brion Vibber|accessdate=2009-02-26}}</ref> was added to MediaWiki's built-in search and Wikipedia switched from [[MySQL]] to Lucene for searching. Currently Lucene Search 2.1,<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Lucene-search
|title=Extension:Lucene-search|publisher=Wikimedia Foundation Inc.|accessdate=2009-08-31}}</ref> which is written in [[Java (programming language)|Java]] and based on Lucene library 2.3,<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://svn.wikimedia.org/svnroot/mediawiki/branches/lucene-search-2.1/lib/
|title=mediawiki&nbsp;— Revision 55688: /branches/lucene-search-2.1/lib
|publisher=Wikimedia Foundation Inc.|accessdate=2009-08-31}}</ref> is used.

[[File:Wikimedia-servers-2009-04-05.svg|thumb|alt=Diagram showing flow of data between wikipedia's servers. Twenty database servers talk to hundreds of Apache servers in the backend; Apaches talk to fifty squids in the frontend.|Overview of system architecture, April 2009. See [[:meta:Server layout diagrams|server layout diagrams on Meta-Wiki]].]]
Wikipedia currently runs on dedicated [[cluster (computing)|clusters]] of [[Linux]] servers (mainly [[Ubuntu (operating system)|Ubuntu]]),<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyName=Servers+and+Data+Center&articleId=9116787&taxonomyId=154&pageNumber=1 |title=Wikipedia simplifies IT infrastructure by moving to one Linux vendor |publisher=Computerworld.com |author=Todd R. Weiss |date=October 9, 2008 (Computerworld) |accessdate=2008-11-01}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081009-wikipedia-adopts-ubuntu-for-its-server-infrastructure.html |title=Wikipedia adopts Ubuntu for its server infrastructure |publisher=Arstechnica.com |date= |accessdate=2008-11-01}}</ref> with a few [[OpenSolaris]] machines for [[ZFS]]. As of December 2009, there were 300 in [[Florida]] and 44 in [[Amsterdam]].<ref name="servers">{{cite web|url=http://wikitech.wikimedia.org/view/Server_roles|title=Server roles at wikitech.wikimedia.org|accessdate=2009-12-08}}</ref> Wikipedia employed a single server until 2004, when the server setup was expanded into a distributed [[multitier architecture]]. In January 2005, the project ran on 39 [[Dedicated hosting service|dedicated servers]] in Florida. This configuration included a single master [[database server]] running [[MySQL]], multiple slave database servers, 21 [[web server]]s running the [[Apache HTTP Server]], and seven [[Squid (software)|Squid cache]] servers.

Wikipedia receives between 25,000 and 60,000 page requests per second, depending on time of day.<ref>"[[tools:~leon/stats/reqstats/reqstats-monthly.png|Monthly request statistics]]", Wikimedia. Retrieved on 2008-10-31.</ref> Page requests are first passed to a front-end layer of [[Squid (software)|Squid caching]] servers.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://dammit.lt/uc/workbook2007.pdf |format=PDF|title=Wikipedia: Site internals, configuration, code examples and management issues |author=Domas Mituzas |publisher=MySQL Users Conference 2007 |accessdate=2008-06-27}}</ref> Further statistics are available based on a publicly available 3-months Wikipedia access trace.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.globule.org/publi/WWADH_comnet2009.html |title=Wikipedia Workload Analysis for Decentralized Hosting |author=Guido Urdaneta, Guillaume Pierre and Maarten van Steen |publisher=Elsevier Computer Networks 53(11), pp. 1830–1845, June 2009}}</ref> Requests that cannot be served from the Squid cache are sent to load-balancing servers running the [[Linux Virtual Server]] software, which in turn pass the request to one of the Apache web servers for page rendering from the database. The web servers deliver pages as requested, performing page rendering for all the language editions of Wikipedia. To increase speed further, rendered pages are cached in a distributed memory cache until invalidated, allowing page rendering to be skipped entirely for most common page accesses. Two larger clusters in the Netherlands and Korea now handle much of Wikipedia's traffic load.

===Delivery media{{anchor|Wikipedia mobile access|Wikipedia mobile|Mobile access}}===
Wikipedia's original medium was for users to read and edit content using any standard [[web browser]] through a fixed [[internet access|internet connection]]. However, Wikipedia content is now also accessible through offline media and through the [[mobile web]].

On [[mobile devices]] access to Wikipedia from [[mobile phone]]s was possible as early as 2004, through the [[Wireless Application Protocol]] (WAP), through the [[Wapedia]] service. In June 2007, Wikipedia launched [http://en.mobile.wikipedia.org/ en.mobile.wikipedia.org], an official website for wireless devices. In 2009 a newer mobile service was officially released,<ref>{{cite web|title=Wikimedia Mobile is Officially Launched|url=http://techblog.wikimedia.org/2009/06/wikimedia-mobile-launch/|date=2009-06-30|work=Wikimedia Technical Blog|accessdate=2009-07-22}}</ref> located at [http://en.m.wikipedia.org/ en.m.wikipedia.org], which caters to more advanced mobile devices such as the [[iPhone]], [[Android (operating system)|Android]]-based devices, or the [[Palm Pre]]. Several other methods of mobile access to Wikipedia have emerged (See {{srlink|Help:Mobile device}}). Several devices and applications optimise or enhance the display of Wikipedia content for mobile devices, while some also incorporate additional features such as use of Wikipedia [[metadata]] (See {{srlink|Wikipedia:Metadata}}), such as [[geoinformation]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/articles/comments/15802/ |title=iPhone Gems: Wikipedia Apps |date=30 Nov 2008 |accessdate=22 July 2008 }}</ref>

Collections of Wikipedia articles have been published on [[optical disk]]s. An English version, [[Wikipedia CD Selection|2006 Wikipedia CD Selection]], contained about 2,000 articles.<ref>"[http://www.wikipediaondvd.com/ Wikipedia on DVD]". Linterweb. Accessed June 1, 2007. "Linterweb is authorized to make a commercial use of the Wikipedia trademark restricted to the selling of the Encyclopedia CDs and DVDs."</ref><ref>"[http://www.wikipediaondvd.com/site.php?temp=buy Wikipedia 0.5 Available on a CD-ROM]". ''Wikipedia on DVD''. Linterweb. Accessed June 1, 2007. "The DVD or CD-ROM version 0.5 was commercially available for purchase."</ref> The Polish version contains nearly 240,000 articles.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Polska_Wikipedia_na_DVD_%28z_Helionem%29/en |title=Polish Wikipedia on DVD |accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref> There are also German versions.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia-Distribution |title=Wikipedia:DVD |accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref>

==License and language editions==
{{See also|List of Wikipedias}}
All text in Wikipedia was covered by [[GNU Free Documentation License]] (GFDL), a [[copyleft]] license permitting the redistribution, creation of derivative works, and commercial use of content while authors retain copyright of their work,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyrights |title=Wikipedia:Copyrights |publisher=English Wikipedia |accessdate=2008-04-22}}</ref> up until June 2009, when the site switched to [[Creative Commons]] Attribution-ShareAlike (CC-by-SA) 3.0.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://blog.wikimedia.org/2009/05/21/wikimedia-community-approves-license-migration/ |title=Wikimedia community approves license migration |work=Wikimedia Foundation|publisher=Wikimedia Foundation |accessdate=2009-05-21}}</ref> Wikipedia had been working on the switch to [[Creative Commons licenses]] because the GFDL, initially designed for software manuals, is not suitable for online reference works and because the two licenses were incompatible.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:License_update
|title=Resolution:License update
|year=2007
|author=Walter Vermeir
|publisher=Wikizine
|accessdate=2007-12-04}}</ref> In response to the Wikimedia Foundation's request, in November 2008, the [[Free Software Foundation]] (FSF) released a new version of GFDL designed specifically to allow Wikipedia to {{srlink|Wikipedia:Transition to Creative Commons licensing|relicense its content to CC-BY-SA}} by August 1, 2009. Wikipedia and its sister projects held a community-wide referendum to decide whether or not to make the license switch.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Licensing_update/Questions_and_Answers |title=Licensing update/Questions and Answers |work=Wikimedia Meta |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation |accessdate=2009-02-15}}</ref> The referendum took place from April 9 to 30.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Licensing_update/Timeline |title=Licensing_update/Timeline |work=Wikimedia Meta |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation |accessdate=2009-04-05}}</ref> The results were 75.8% "Yes", 10.5% "No", and 13.7% "No opinion".<ref name="voteresult">[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Licensing_update/Result Wikimedia.org]</ref> In consequence of the referendum, the Wikimedia Board of Trustees voted to change to the Creative Commons license, effective June 15, 2009.<ref name="voteresult"/> The position that Wikipedia is merely a hosting service has been successfully used as a defense in court.<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSL0280486220071102?feedType=RSS&feedName=internetNews
|title=Wikipedia cleared in French defamation case
|publisher=Reuters
|date=2007-11-02
|accessdate=2007-11-02}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080502-dumb-idea-suing-wikipedia-for-calling-you-dumb.html |title=Dumb idea: suing Wikipedia for calling you "dumb" |first=Nate |last=Anderson |date=2008-05-02 |publisher=
Ars Technica |accessdate=2008-05-04}}</ref>

[[File:PercentWikipediasGraph.png|thumb|right|Percentage of all Wikipedia articles in English (red) and top ten largest language editions (blue). As of July 2007, less than 23% of Wikipedia articles are in English.]]
The handling of media files (e.g., image files) varies across language editions. Some language editions, such as the English Wikipedia, include non-free image files under [[fair use]] doctrine, while the others have opted not to. This is in part because of the difference in copyright laws between countries; for example, the notion of fair use does not exist in [[Japanese copyright law]]. Media files covered by [[free content]] licenses (e.g., Creative Commons' cc-by-sa) are shared across language editions via [[Wikimedia Commons]] repository, a project operated by the Wikimedia Foundation.

There are currently 262&nbsp;[[List of Wikipedias|language editions of Wikipedia]]; of these, 24 have over 100,000&nbsp;articles and 81 have over 1,000&nbsp;articles.<ref name="ListOfWikipedias">{{cite web | url = http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:Statistics | title = Statistics | publisher = [[English Wikipedia]] | accessdate = 2008-06-21 }}</ref> According to Alexa, the English [[subdomain]] (wiki.riteme.site; [[English Wikipedia]]) receives approximately 54% of Wikipedia's cumulative traffic, with the remaining split among the other languages (Japanese: 10%, German: 8%, Spanish: 5%, Russian: 4%, French: 4%, Italian: 3%).<ref name="AlexaStats" /> As of July 2008, the five largest language editions are (in order of article count) [[English Wikipedia|English]], [[German Wikipedia|German]], [[French Wikipedia|French]], [[Polish Wikipedia|Polish]], and [[Japanese Wikipedia]]s.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Multilingual_statistics |title=Wikipedia:Multilingual statistics |publisher=English Wikipedia |accessdate=2007-12-23}}</ref>

Since Wikipedia is web-based and therefore worldwide, contributors of a same language edition may use different dialects or may come from different countries (as is the case for the [[English Wikipedia|English edition]]). These differences may lead to some conflicts over [[American and British English spelling differences|spelling differences]], (e.g. ''color'' vs. ''colour'')<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Spelling|title= spelling | work = Manual of Style | publisher = Wikipedia |accessdate=2007-05-19}}</ref> or points of view.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias|title=Countering systemic bias|accessdate=2007-05-19}}</ref>
Though the various language editions are held to global policies such as "neutral point of view," they diverge on some points of policy and practice, most notably on whether images that are not [[free content|licensed freely]] may be used under a claim of [[fair use]].<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
|title=Fair use
|publisher=Meta wiki
|accessdate=2007-07-14}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Images_on_Wikipedia
|title=Images on Wikipedia
|accessdate=2007-07-14}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal
|url=http://www.research.ibm.com/visual/papers/viegas_hicss_visual_wikipedia.pdf
|format=PDF|author=Fernanda B. Viégas
|title=The Visual Side of Wikipedia
|publisher=Visual Communication Lab, IBM Research
|date=2007-01-03
|accessdate=2007-10-30}}</ref>

[[File:English Wikipedia contributors by country.svg|thumb|left|alt=Pie chart with percentages of contributors by country: USA 52.1, UK 15.9, Canada 7.3, Austria 4.4, Germany 1.8, Netherlands 1.6, France 1, Others 15.8.|Contributors for English Wikipedia by country as of September 2006.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Edits_by_project_and_country_of_origin |title=Edits by project and country of origin |date=2006-09-04 |accessdate=2007-10-25 }}</ref>]]
Jimmy Wales has described Wikipedia as "an effort to create and distribute a free encyclopedia of the highest possible quality to every single person on the planet in their own language".<ref>[[Jimmy Wales]], "[http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2005-March/020469.html Wikipedia is an encyclopedia]", March 8, 2005, <Wikipedia-l@wikimedia.org></ref> Though each language edition functions more or less independently, some efforts are made to supervise them all. They are coordinated in part by Meta-Wiki, the Wikimedia Foundation's wiki devoted to maintaining all of its projects (Wikipedia and others).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/|title=Meta-Wiki|accessdate=2009-03-24|publisher=Wikimedia Foundation}}</ref> For instance, Meta-Wiki provides important statistics on all language editions of Wikipedia,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Statistics|title=Meta-Wiki Statistics|accessdate=2008-03-24|publisher=Wikimedia Foundation}}</ref> and it maintains a list of articles every Wikipedia should have.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_articles_every_Wikipedia_should_have|title=List of articles every Wikipedia should have|accessdate=2008-03-24|publisher=Wikimedia Foundation}}</ref> The list concerns basic content by subject: biography, history, geography, society, culture, science, technology, foodstuffs, and mathematics. As for the rest, it is not rare for articles strongly related to a particular language not to have counterparts in another edition. For example, articles about small towns in the United States might only be available in English.

Translated articles represent only a small portion of articles in most editions, in part because automated translation of articles is disallowed.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Translations |title=Wikipedia: Translation |work=English Wikipedia |accessdate=2007-02-03}}</ref> Articles available in more than one language may offer "[[InterWiki]]" links, which link to the counterpart articles in other editions.

==Cultural significance==
<!-- Every single cultural, media or Internet reference to Wikipedia does not need to be mentioned here and differentiation between what constitutes a matter of significance and what is run-of-the-mill is important when adding content here. -->
[[Image:Time Between Edits Graph Jul05-Present.png|thumb|Graph showing the number of days between every 10,000,000th edit.]]
[[File:White Nerdy YOU SUCK cropped.jpg|thumb|left|alt=Wikipedia page on Atlantic Records being edited to read: "You suck!"|Wikipedia shown in [["Weird Al" Yankovic|Weird Al]]'s music video for his song "[[White & Nerdy]]".]]
{{Main|Wikipedia in culture}}
In addition to [[Logistic function|logistic growth]] in the number of its articles,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Modelling_Wikipedia%27s_growth |title=Wikipedia:Modelling Wikipedia's growth |accessdate=2007-12-22}}</ref> Wikipedia has steadily gained status as a general reference website since its inception in 2001.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=849 |title=694 Million People Currently Use the Internet Worldwide According To comScore Networks |date=2006-05-04 |publisher=comScore |accessdate=2007-12-16 |quote=Wikipedia has emerged as a site that continues to increase in popularity, both globally and in the U.S.}}</ref> According to [[Alexa Internet|Alexa]] and [[comScore]], Wikipedia is among the ten most visited websites worldwide.<ref name="AlexaTop500">{{cite web |url=http://www.alexa.com/site/ds/top_sites?ts_mode=global&lang=none |title=Top 500 |publisher=[[Alexa Internet|Alexa]] |accessdate=2009-10-13 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.comscore.com/press/data.asp |title=comScore Data Center |month=October | year=2007 |accessdate=2008-01-19}}{{Dead link|url=http://www.comscore.com/press/data.asp|date=May 2009|date=February 2010}}</ref> Of the top ten, Wikipedia is the only non-profit website. The growth of Wikipedia has been fueled by its dominant position in Google search results;<ref>{{cite journal |url=http://www.hoover.org/publications/ednext/16111162.html |title=Wikipedia or Wickedpedia? |journal=Hoover Institution |first=Michael J |last= Petrilli |volume=8 |issue=2 |accessdate=2008-03-21}}</ref> about 50% of search engine traffic to Wikipedia comes from Google,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://weblogs.hitwise.com/leeann-prescott/2007/02/wikipedia_traffic_sources.html |title=Google Traffic To Wikipedia up 166% Year over Year |publisher=Hitwise |date=2007-02-16 |accessdate=2007-12-22}}</ref> a good portion of which is related to academic research.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://weblogs.hitwise.com/leeann-prescott/2006/10/wikipedia_and_academic_researc.html |title=Wikipedia and Academic Research |publisher=Hitwise |date=2006-10-17 |accessdate=2008-02-06}}</ref> In April 2007 the [[Pew Research Center|Pew]] Internet and American Life project found that one third of US Internet users consulted Wikipedia.<ref>{{cite web |first=Lee |last=Rainie |coauthor=Bill Tancer |title=Wikipedia users |publisher=Pew Research Center |work=Pew Internet & American Life Project |date=2007-12-15 |url=http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Wikipedia07.pdf |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20080306031354/http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Wikipedia07.pdf |archivedate=2008-03-06 |format=PDF |accessdate=2007-12-15 |quote=36% of online American adults consult Wikipedia. It is particularly popular with the well-educated and current college-age students.}}</ref> In October 2006, the site was estimated to have a hypothetical market value of $580&nbsp;million if it ran advertisements.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.watchmojo.com/web/blog/?p=626
|title=What is Wikipedia.org's Valuation?
|first=Ashkan
|last=Karbasfrooshan
|date=2006-10-26
|accessdate=2007-12-01}}</ref>

Wikipedia's content has also been used in academic studies, books, conferences, and court cases.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia in the media |title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia in the media |work=Wikipedia |accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200216886.pdf|title=Bourgeois ''et al.'' v. Peters ''et al.''|format=PDF|accessdate=2007-02-06}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID1346311_code835394.pdf?abstractid=1346311|title=Wikipedian Justice|format=PDF|accessdate=2009-06-09}}</ref> The [[Parliament of Canada]]'s website refers to Wikipedia's article on [[same-sex marriage]] in the "related links" section of its "further reading" list for the [[Civil Marriage Act]].<ref>[http://www.parl.gc.ca/LEGISINFO/index.asp?Session=13&query=4381&List=ot#2 C-38 Government of Canada Site | Site du gouvernement du Canada], LEGISINFO (March 28, 2005)</ref> The encyclopedia's assertions are increasingly used as a source by organizations such as the U.S. Federal Courts and the [[World Intellectual Property Organization]]<ref name="WP_court_source">{{cite journal |last=Arias |first=Martha L. |date=2007-01-29 |url=http://www.ibls.com/internet_law_news_portal_view.aspx?s=latestnews&id=1668 |title=Wikipedia: The Free Online Encyclopedia and its Use as Court Source |journal=Internet Business Law Services |accessdate=2008-12-26}} (the name "''World Intellectual Property Office''" should however read "''World Intellectual Property Organization''" in this source)</ref>&nbsp;– though mainly for ''supporting information'' rather than information decisive to a case.<ref>{{cite news |last=Cohen |first=Noam |date=2007-01-29 |title=Courts Turn to Wikipedia, but Selectively |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/29/technology/29wikipedia.html |journal=New York Times |accessdate=2008-12-26 | work=The New York Times}}</ref> Content appearing on Wikipedia has also been cited as a source and referenced in some [[United States Intelligence Community|U.S. intelligence agency]] reports.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2007/03/the_wikipedia_factor_in_us_int.html |title=The Wikipedia Factor in U.S. Intelligence |first=Steven | last= Aftergood |publisher=Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy |date=2007-03-21 |accessdate=2007-04-14}}</ref> In December 2008, the scientific journal [[RNA Biology]] launched a new section for descriptions of families of RNA molecules and requires authors who contribute to the section to also submit a draft article on the [[Rfam|RNA family]] for publication in Wikipedia.<ref>{{Cite journal | last = Butler | first = Declan | date = December 16, 2008 | year = 2008 | title = Publish in Wikipedia or perish | journal = Nature News | doi = 10.1038/news.2008.1312 }}</ref>

[[File:Onion wikipedia.jpg|thumb|alt=The Onion newspaper front page.|''[[The Onion]]'' satirical newspaper headline "Wikipedia Celebrates 750 Years Of American Independence."]]
Wikipedia has also been used as a source in [[journalism]],<ref>{{cite news |title=Wikipedia in the Newsroom |url=http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4461 |date=[[February 2008|February]]/March 2008 |publisher=American Journalism Review|first=Donna |last=Shaw |accessdate=2008-02-11}}</ref> often without attribution, and several reporters have been dismissed for plagiarizing from Wikipedia.<ref>Shizuoka newspaper plagiarized Wikipedia article, ''Japan News Review'', July 5, 2007</ref><ref>"[http://web.archive.org/web/20071015045010/http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA010307.02A.richter.132c153.html Express-News staffer resigns after plagiarism in column is discovered]", ''[[San Antonio Express-News]]'', January 9, 2007.</ref><ref>"[http://archives.starbulletin.com/2006/01/13/news/story03.html Inquiry prompts reporter's dismissal]", ''[[Honolulu Star-Bulletin]]'', January 13, 2007.</ref>
In July 2007, Wikipedia was the focus of a 30-minute documentary on [[BBC Radio 4]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/factual/pip/efv21/|title=Radio 4 Documentary |accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref> which argued that, with increased usage and awareness, the number of references to Wikipedia in popular culture is such that the term is one of a select band of 21st-century nouns that are so familiar ([[Google]], [[Facebook]], [[YouTube]]) that they no longer need explanation and are on a par with such 20th-century terms as [[The Hoover Company|Hoovering]] or [[Coca-Cola]]. Many parody Wikipedia's openness, with characters vandalizing or modifying the online encyclopedia project's articles. Notably, comedian [[Stephen Colbert]] has parodied or referenced Wikipedia on numerous episodes of his show ''[[The Colbert Report]]'' and coined the related term "[[Cultural_impact_of_The_Colbert_Report#Wikipedia_references|wikiality]]".<ref name="wikiality" />

Some media sources satirize Wikipedia's susceptibility to inserted inaccuracies. An example can be found in a front-page article in ''[[The Onion]]'' in July 2006, with the title "Wikipedia Celebrates 750 Years of American Independence".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.theonion.com/content/node/50902 |title=Wikipedia Celebrates 750 Years Of American Independence |accessdate=October 15, 2006 |year=2006 |work=[[The Onion]]}}</ref> Others draw upon Wikipedia's motto, such as in "[[The Negotiation]]," an episode of ''[[The Office (U.S. TV series)|The Office]]'', where character [[Michael Scott (The Office)|Michael Scott]] says "Wikipedia is the best thing ever. Anyone in the world can write anything they want about any subject, so you know you are getting the best possible information". More rarely, Wikipedia's internal policies are parodied, such as in the ''[[xkcd]]'' strip "Wikipedian Protester."

[[File:Webcomic xkcd - Wikipedian protester.png|thumb|left|alt=Simple line drawing of man speaking at podium; one member of a large crowd holds up a sign saying "citation needed".|An ''[[xkcd]]'' strip titled "Wikipedian Protester".]]

On September 28, 2007, Italian politician [[Franco Grillini]] raised a parliamentary question with the Minister of Cultural Resources and Activities about the necessity of [[Panoramafreiheit|freedom of panorama]]. He said that the lack of such freedom forced Wikipedia, "the seventh most consulted website" to forbid all images of modern Italian buildings and art, and claimed this was hugely damaging to tourist revenues.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.grillini.it/show.php?4885|title=Comunicato stampa. On. Franco Grillini. Wikipedia. Interrogazione a Rutelli. Con "diritto di panorama" promuovere arte e architettura contemporanea italiana. Rivedere con urgenza legge copyright|date=October 12, 2007 |accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref>

[[File:Quadriga-verleihung-rr-02.jpg|thumb|[[Jimmy Wales]] receiving the [[Quadriga (award)|Quadriga]] ''A Mission of Enlightenment'' award.]]
On September 16, 2007, ''[[The Washington Post]]'' reported that Wikipedia had become a focal point in the [[United States presidential election, 2008|2008 U.S. election campaign]], saying, "Type a candidate's name into Google, and among the first results is a Wikipedia page, making those entries arguably as important as any ad in defining a candidate. Already, the presidential entries are being edited, dissected and debated countless times each day."<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/16/AR2007091601699_pf.html
|title=On Wikipedia, Debating 2008 Hopefuls' Every Facet
|author=Jose Antonio Vargas
|publisher=The Washington Post
|date=2007-09-17
|accessdate=2008-12-26}}
</ref> An October 2007 [[Reuters]] article, titled "Wikipedia page the latest status symbol", reported the recent phenomenon of how having a Wikipedia article vindicates one's notability.<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2232893820071022?sp=true
|title=Wikipedia page the latest status symbol
|author=Jennifer Ablan
|publisher=Reuters
|date=2007-10-22
|accessdate=2007-10-24}}</ref>

Wikipedia won two major awards in May 2004.<ref>"[[m:Trophy box|Trophy Box]]", [[Wikipedia:Meta|Meta-Wiki]] (March 28, 2005).</ref> The first was a Golden Nica for Digital Communities of the annual [[Prix Ars Electronica]] contest; this came with a €10,000 (£6,588; $12,700) grant and an invitation to present at the PAE Cyberarts Festival in [[Austria]] later that year. The second was a Judges' [[Webby Awards|Webby Award]] for the "community" category.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.webbyawards.com/webbys/winners-2004.php|title=Webby Awards 2004|publisher=The International Academy of Digital Arts and Sciences|year=2004|accessdate=2007-06-19}}</ref> Wikipedia was also nominated for a "Best Practices" Webby. On January 26, 2007, Wikipedia was also awarded the fourth highest brand ranking by the readers of brandchannel.com, receiving 15% of the votes in answer to the question "Which brand had the most impact on our lives in 2006?"<ref>{{cite news |first=Anthony |last=Zumpano |title=Similar Search Results: Google Wins |url=http://www.brandchannel.com/features_effect.asp?pf_id=352 |publisher=Interbrand |date=2007-01-29 |accessdate=2007-01-28 }}</ref>

In September 2008, Wikipedia received [[Quadriga (award)|Quadriga]] ''A Mission of Enlightenment'' award of Werkstatt Deutschland along with [[Boris Tadić]], [[Eckart Höfling]], and [[Peter Gabriel]]. The award was presented to [[Jimmy Wales]] by [[David Weinberger]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://loomarea.com/die_quadriga/e/index.php?title=Award_2008|title=Die Quadriga&nbsp;— Award 2008 |accessdate=2008-12-26}}</ref>

In July 2009, [[BBC Radio 4]] broadcast a comedy series called ''[[Bigipedia]]'', which was set on a website which was a [[parody]] of Wikipedia. Some of the sketches were directly inspired by Wikipedia and its articles.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.comedy.org.uk/guide/radio/bigipedia/interview/|title=Interview With Nick Doody and Matt Kirshen|publisher=[[British Comedy Guide]]|accessdate=31 July 2009}}</ref>

==Related projects==
{{sisterlinks}}
A number of interactive multimedia encyclopedias incorporating entries written by the public existed long before Wikipedia was founded. The first of these was the 1986 [[BBC Domesday Project]], which included text (entered on [[BBC Micro]] computers) and photographs from over 1&nbsp;million contributors in the [[United Kingdom|UK]], and covering the geography, art, and culture of the UK. This was the first interactive multimedia encyclopedia (and was also the first major multimedia document connected through internal links), with the majority of articles being accessible through an interactive map of the UK. The user-interface and part of the content of the Domesday Project were emulated on a website until 2008.<ref name="Domesday Project">[http://www.domesday1986.com/ Website discussing the emulator of the Domesday Project User Interface] for the data from the Community Disc (contributions from the general public); the site is currently out of action following the death of its creator</ref> One of the most successful early online encyclopedias incorporating entries by the public was [[h2g2]], which was created by [[Douglas Adams]] and is run by the [[BBC]]. The h2g2 encyclopedia was relatively light-hearted, focusing on articles which were both witty and informative. Both of these projects had similarities with Wikipedia, but neither gave full editorial freedom to public users. A similar non-wiki project, the [[GNUPedia]] project, co-existed with Nupedia early in its history; however, it has been retired and its creator, [[free software]] figure [[Richard Stallman]], has lent his support to Wikipedia.<ref name="stallman1999" />

Wikipedia has also spawned several sister projects, which are also run by the [[Wikimedia Foundation]]. The first, "In Memoriam: September<!--Do not reformat this date, it is quoted--> 11 Wiki",<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.sep11memories.org/wiki/In_Memoriam |title=In Memoriam: September 11, 2001 |accessdate=2007-02-06}}</ref> created in October 2002,<ref>[http://www.sep11memories.org/index.php?title=In_Memoriam&oldid=1502 First edit to the wiki] In Memoriam: September 11 wiki (October 28, 2002),</ref> detailed the [[September 11 attacks]]; this project was closed in October 2006. [[Wiktionary]], a dictionary project, was launched in December 2002;<ref>"[http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_News&diff=prev&oldid=4133 Announcement of Wiktionary's creation]", December 12, 2002. Retrieved on 2007-02-02.</ref> [[Wikiquote]], a collection of quotations, a week after Wikimedia launched, and [[Wikibooks]], a collection of collaboratively written free textbooks and annotated texts. Wikimedia has since started a number of other projects, including [[Wikiversity]], a project for the creation of free learning materials and the provision of online learning activities.<ref name="OurProjects">"[http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Our_projects Our projects]", [[Wikimedia Foundation]]. Retrieved on 2007-01-24</ref> None of these sister projects, however, has come to meet the success of Wikipedia.

Several languages of Wikipedia also maintain a reference desk, where volunteers answer questions from the general public. According to a study by Pnina Shachaf in the Journal of Documentation, the quality of the Wikipedia reference desk is comparable to a standard library reference desk, with an accuracy of 55%.<ref>"[http://www.slis.indiana.edu/news/story.php?story_id=2064 Wikipedia Reference Desk]", fetched 17 February 2010</ref>

Some subsets of Wikipedia's information have been developed, often with additional review for specific purposes.
For example, Wikipedia for Schools, the Wikipedia series of CDs/DVDs, produced by Wikipedians and [[SOS Children's Villages UK|SOS Children]], is a free, hand-checked, non-commercial selection from Wikipedia targeted around the [[National Curriculum (UK)|UK National Curriculum]] and intended to be useful for much of the English speaking world.<ref>[http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_CD_Selection Wikipedia CD Selection]. Accessed 2009 September 8</ref> The project is available online; an equivalent print encyclopedia would require roughly 20 volumes. There has also been an attempt to put a select subset of Wikipedia's articles into printed book form.<ref>{{cite news|title=Wikipedia turned into book|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/5549589/Wikipedia-turned-into-book.html|archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/5jeCgQjpj|publisher=Telegraph Media Group|work=Telegraph.co.uk|date=2009-06-16|accessdate=2009-09-08|archivedate=2009-09-08 | location=London}}</ref><ref>[http://schools-wikipedia.org Wikipedia Selection for Schools]. Accessed 2009 September 8.</ref>

Other websites centered on collaborative [[knowledge base]] development have drawn inspiration from or inspired Wikipedia. Some, such as [[Susning.nu]], [[Enciclopedia Libre Universal en Español|Enciclopedia Libre]], [[Hudong]], [[Baidu Baike]], and [[WikiZnanie]] likewise employ no formal review process, whereas others use more traditional [[peer review]], such as [[Encyclopedia of Life]], [[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]], [[Scholarpedia]], [[h2g2]], and [[Everything2]]. The online wiki-based encyclopedia [[Citizendium]] was started by Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger in an attempt to create an "expert-friendly" Wikipedia.<ref name="defactoleader">{{cite news
|first=Holden
|last=Frith
|url=http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article1571519.ece
|title=Wikipedia founder launches rival online encyclopedia
|publisher=The Times
|date=March 26, 2007,
|accessdate=2007-06-27
|quote=Wikipedia's de facto leader, Jimmy Wales, stood by the site's format.&nbsp;– Holden Frith. | location=London}}</ref><ref name="Orlowski18">
{{cite news
|first=Andrew
|last=Orlowski
|authorlink=Andrew Orlowski
|url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/18/sanger_forks_wikipedia/
|title=Wikipedia founder forks Wikipedia, More experts, less fiddling?
|publisher=The Register
|date=September 18, 2006
|accessdate=2007-06-27
|quote=Larry Sanger describes the Citizendium project as a "progressive or gradual fork", with the major difference that experts have the final say over edits.}}&nbsp;– Andrew Orlowski.</ref><ref name="JayLyman">{{cite news
|first=Jay
|last=Lyman
|url=http://www.crmbuyer.com/story/53137.html
|title=Wikipedia Co-Founder Planning New Expert-Authored Site
|publisher=LinuxInsider
|date=September 20, 2006
|accessdate=2007-06-27}}</ref>

==See also==
{{portal|Wikipedia|Wikipedia-logo-en-big.png}}
* [[Academic studies about Wikipedia]]
* [[Behind the Mirror: A Search for a Natural History of Human Knowledge]], philosophical background
* [[Criticism of Wikipedia]]
* [[Democratization of knowledge]]
* [[GNUPedia]]
* [[Interpedia]], an early proposal for a collaborative Internet encyclopedia
* [[List of online encyclopedias]]
* [[List of wikis]]
* [[Network effects]]
* [[Nupedia]]
* [[Open content]]
* [[USA Congressional staff edits to Wikipedia]]
* [[User-generated content]]
* [[Wikipedia Review]]

==Notes==
{{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}

==Further reading==
;Academic studies
{{Main|Academic studies about Wikipedia}}
* {{cite journal|first=Finn|last=Nielsen|url=http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue12_8/nielsen/index.html|title=Scientific Citations in Wikipedia|journal=[[First Monday]]|volume=12 |issue=8|month=August|year=2007|accessdate=2008-02-22}}
* {{cite journal|last=Pfeil|first=Ulrike|year=2006|title=Cultural Differences in Collaborative Authoring of Wikipedia|journal=Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication|volume=12|issue=1|url=http://jcmc.indiana.edu./vol12/issue1/pfeil.html |accessdate=2008-12-26|doi=10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00316.x|page=88|pages=88|coauthors=Panayiotis Zaphiris and Chee Siang Ang}}
* Priedhorsky, Reid, Jilin Chen, Shyong (Tony) K. Lam, Katherine Panciera, Loren Terveen, and John Riedl. [http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1316624.1316663 "Creating, Destroying, and Restoring Value in Wikipedia"]. Proc. GROUP 2007, doi: 1316624.131663.
* {{cite conference
| first = Joseph
| last = Reagle
| title = Do as I Do: Authorial Leadership in Wikipedia
| booktitle = WikiSym '07: Proceedings of the 2007 International Symposium on Wikis
| publisher = ACM
| year = 2007| location = Montreal, Canada
| url = http://reagle.org/joseph/2007/10/Wikipedia-Authorial-Leadership.pdf
| accessdate = 2008-12-26}}
* {{cite journal |url=http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue12_4/wilkinson/index.html |title=Assessing the Value of Cooperation in Wikipedia |first=Dennis M.|last=Wilkinson |journal=First Monday|volume=12|issue=4|month=April|year=2007| accessdate=2008-02-22 |coauthor=Bernardo A. Huberman}}
* {{cite journal |url=http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1458162## |title=Wikipedia’s Labor Squeeze and its Consequences |first=Eric |last=Goldman |year=2010 |journal=Journal of Telecommunications and High Technology Law |volume=8}} ([http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2010/02/catching_up_wit.htm a blog post by the autor])

;Books
* {{cite book|author=Phoebe Ayers, Charles Matthews, and Ben Yates|title=How Wikipedia Works: And How You Can Be a Part of It |publisher=No Starch Press |location=San Francisco |month=September |year=2008 |isbn=978-1-59327-176-3 |accessdate=2008-12-26}}
* {{cite book |last=Broughton |first=John|title=[[Wikipedia - The Missing Manual]] |publisher=O'Reilly Media |location= |month= |year=2008 |isbn=0-596-51516-2 |accessdate=2008-12-26}} (See book rev. by Baker, as listed below.)
* {{cite book | last = Broughton | first = John | title = Wikipedia Reader's Guide | publisher = Pogue Press | location = Sebastopol | year = 2008 | isbn = 059652174X }}
* {{cite book | last = Lih | first = Andrew | authorlink = Andrew Lih | title = [[The Wikipedia Revolution]] | publisher = Hyperion | location = New York | year = 2009 | isbn = 1401303714 }}
* {{cite book | last = Dalby | first = Andrew | authorlink = Andrew Dalby |title = [[The World and Wikipedia|The World and Wikipedia: How We are Editing Reality]] | publisher = Siduri | year = 2009 | isbn = 978-0956205209 }}

;Book reviews and other articles
* [[L. Gordon Crovitz|Crovitz, L. Gordon]]. [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123897399273491031.html "Wikipedia's Old-Fashioned Revolution: The online encyclopedia is fast becoming the best."] (Originally published in [[Wall Street Journal|''Wall Street Journal'' online]]&nbsp;– April 6, 2009, 8:34 A.M. ET)
* [[Nicholson Baker|Baker, Nicholson]]. [http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21131 "The Charms of Wikipedia"]. ''[[The New York Review of Books]]'', March 20, 2008. Accessed December 17, 2008. (Book rev. of ''The Missing Manual'', by John Broughton, as listed above.)
* [[Roy Rosenzweig|Rosenzweig, Roy]]. [http://chnm.gmu.edu/resources/essays/d/42 Can History be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past]. (Originally published in ''[[Journal of American History]]'' 93.1 (June 2006): 117–46.)

;Learning resources
* [[v:wikipedia#Learning resources|Wikiversity list of learning resources]]. (Includes related courses, [[Web conferencing|Web-based seminars]], slides, lecture notes, text books, quizzes, glossaries, etc.)

;Other media coverage
* {{cite news |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/01/magazine/01WIKIPEDIA-t.html?_r=1&ref=magazine&oref=slogin |title=All the News That's Fit to Print Out|first=Jonathan |last=Dee|work=The New York Times Magazine |publisher=The New York Times Company |date=2007-07-01|accessdate=2008-02-22}}
* {{cite news|last name=Balke|first name=Jeff|url=http://blogs.chron.com/brokenrecord/2008/03/for_music_fans_wikipedia_myspa.html|title=For Music Fans: Wikipedia; MySpace|work=[[Houston Chronicle]] ([[Blog]])|date=March 2008|accessdate=2008-12-17}}
* {{cite news|first=Sarah|last=Freeman|url=http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/highlights?articleid=3115718 |title=Can We Really Trust Wikipedia?|date=2007-08-16|work=[[Yorkshire Post]]|publisher=yorkshirepost.co.uk|accessdate=2008-09-20}}
* {{cite news|first=Jim |last=Giles|title=Wikipedia 2.0&nbsp;– Now with Added Trust |url=http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19526226.200|date=2007-09-20|work=[[New Scientist]] |accessdate=2008-01-14}}
* {{cite news|first=Mike |last=Miliard|title=Wikipedia Rules |url=http://thephoenix.com/Boston/Life/52864-Wikipedia-rules/|publisher=[[The Phoenix (newspaper)|The Phoenix]]|date=2007-12-02|accessdate=2008-02-22}}
* {{cite news|first=Marshall|last=Poe|authorlink=Marshall Poe|url=http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200609/wikipedia|title=The Hive|work=[[The Atlantic|The Atlantic Monthly]]|date=September 2006|accessdate=2008-03-22}}
* {{cite news|first=Chris|last=Taylor|url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1066904-1,00.html|title=It's a Wiki, Wiki World|date=2005-05-29|work=[[Time (magazine)|Time]]|publisher=Time, Inc|accessdate=2008-02-22}}
* {{cite news|url=http://www.economist.com/science/tq/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11484062 |title=Technological Quarterly: Brain Scan: The Free-knowledge Fundamentalist|work=[[The Economist|The Economist Web]] and [[Magazine|Print]]|date=2008-06-05|accessdate=2008-06-05|quote=Jimmy Wales changed the world with Wikipedia, the hugely popular online encyclopedia that anyone can edit. What will he do next? [leader].}}
* {{cite news|url=http://www.metrobostonnews.com/us/article/2009/01/28/03/4644-72/index.xml|title=Hoaxers force Wiki to weigh pre-checks Wikipedia|work=[[Metro International|Metro]] Boston edition|date=2009-01-28}}
* [http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/features/is-wikipedia-cracking-up-1543527.html Is Wikipedia Cracking Up?, The Independent, February 3, 2009]
* [http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article5682896.ece The Wiki-snobs Are Taking Over, The Sunday Times, timesonline.co.uk, February 8, 2009]{{Dead link|date=May 2009}}
* {{cite news|first=David|last=Runciman|url=http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n10/runc01_.html |title=Like Boiling a Frog|date=2009-05-28|work=London Review of Books|accessdate=2009-06-03}}
* {{cite news|first=Michael S.|last=Rosenwald|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/22/AR2009102204715.html?hpid=topnews |title=Gatekeeper of D.C.'s entry: Road to city's Wikipedia page goes through a DuPont Circle bedroom|date=2009-10-23|work=The Washington Post|accessdate=2009-10-22}}

==External links==
{{meta|List of Wikipedias}}
{{Wikibooks|Wikipedia}}
{{Spoken Wikipedia|Wikipedia.ogg|2005-06-25}}
* [http://www.wikipedia.org/ Wikipedia]&nbsp;– multilingual portal (contains links to all language editions of the project)
** [http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Press_coverage Press coverage of Wikipedia] at the English Wikipedia
* [http://www.dmoz.org/Computers/Open_Source/Open_Content/Encyclopedias/Wikipedia/ Wikipedia] at the [[Open Directory Project]]
*[http://www.nytimes.com/info/wikipedia/ Wikipedia] topic page at ''[[The New York Times]]''
* [http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jimmy_wales_on_the_birth_of_wikipedia.html Video of TED Talk by Jimmy Wales on the birth of Wikipedia]
* [http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2009/03/wales_on_wikipe.html Audio of interview with Jimmy Wales about Wikipedia in general] on the [[EconTalk]] podcast
* [http://www.stanford.edu/class/ee380/Abstracts/020116.html Wikipedia and why it matters]&nbsp;– Larry Sanger's 2002 talk at [[Stanford University]] about Wikipedia. [http://stanford-online.stanford.edu/courses/ee380/020116-ee380-100.asx video archive] and [[meta:Wikipedia and why it matters|transcript of the talk]]
* {{youtube|id=cqOHbihYbhE|title="Intelligence in Wikipedia" Google TechTalk}}, describing an intelligence project utilizing Wikipedia, and how Wikipedia articles could be auto-generated from web content
{{Template group
|list =
{{Wikipedia}}
{{Wikimedia Foundation}}
{{Wikipedias}}
}}
[[Category:Wikipedia| ]]
[[Category:Advertising-free websites]]
[[Category:Collaborative projects]]
[[Category:Free encyclopedias]]
[[Category:General encyclopedias]]
[[Category:Hypertext]]
[[Category:Human-computer interaction]]
[[Category:Internet history]]
[[Category:Internet properties established in 2001]]
[[Category:Multilingual websites]]
[[Category:New encyclopedism]]
[[Category:Online encyclopedias]]
[[Category:Open content projects]]
[[Category:Scientific revolution]]
[[Category:Social information processing]]
[[Category:Virtual communities]]
[[Category:Web 2.0]]
[[Category:Wikimedia projects]]
[[Category:Wikis]]

{{Link FA|ceb}}
[[ace:Wikipèdia]]
[[af:Wikipedia]]
[[ak:Wikipedia]]
[[als:Wikipedia]]
[[am:ውክፔዲያ]]
[[ang:Ƿicipǣdia]]
[[ar:ويكيبيديا]]
[[an:Biquipedia]]
[[arc:ܘܝܩܝܦܕܝܐ]]
[[roa-rup:Wikipedia]]
[[frp:Vouiquipèdia]]
[[ast:Uiquipedia]]
[[gn:Vikipetã]]
[[ay:Wikipidiya]]
[[az:Vikipediya]]
[[bm:Wikipedi]]
[[bn:উইকিপিডিয়া]]
[[zh-min-nan:Wikipedia]]
[[map-bms:Wikipedia]]
[[ba:Википедия]]
[[be:Вікіпедыя]]
[[be-x-old:Вікіпэдыя]]
[[bh:विकिपीडिया]]
[[bi:Wikipedia]]
[[bar:Wikipedia]]
[[bs:Wikipedia]]
[[br:Wikipedia]]
[[bg:Уикипедия]]
[[ca:Viquipèdia]]
[[cv:Википеди]]
[[ceb:Wikipedya]]
[[cs:Wikipedie]]
[[ch:Wikipedia]]
[[co:Wikipedia]]
[[cy:Wicipedia]]
[[da:Wikipedia]]
[[de:Wikipedia]]
[[dv:ވިކިޕީޑިޔާ]]
[[dsb:Wikipedija]]
[[et:Vikipeedia]]
[[el:Βικιπαίδεια]]
[[myv:Википедиясь]]
[[es:Wikipedia]]
[[eo:Vikipedio]]
[[ext:Wikipédia]]
[[eu:Wikipedia]]
[[fa:ویکی‌پدیا]]
[[fo:Wikipedia]]
[[fr:Wikipédia]]
[[fy:Wikipedia]]
[[ff:Wikipeediya]]
[[fur:Vichipedie]]
[[ga:Vicipéid]]
[[gv:Wikipedia]]
[[gd:Wikipedia]]
[[gl:Wikipedia]]
[[gan:維基百科]]
[[gu:વિકિપીડિયા]]
[[hak:Ngùi-kî pak-khô]]
[[xal:Бикипеди]]
[[ko:위키백과]]
[[haw:Wikipikia]]
[[hy:Վիքիփեդիա]]
[[hi:विकिपीडिया]]
[[hsb:Wikipedija]]
[[hr:Wikipedija]]
[[io:Wikipedio]]
[[ig:Wikipedia]]
[[ilo:Wikipedia]]
[[bpy:উইকিপিডিয়া]]
[[id:Wikipedia]]
[[ia:Wikipedia]]
[[iu:ᐅᐃᑭᐱᑎᐊ/uikipitia]]
[[ik:Uiqipitia]]
[[os:Википеди]]
[[is:Wikipedia]]
[[it:Wikipedia]]
[[he:ויקיפדיה]]
[[jv:Wikipedia]]
[[kl:Wikipedia]]
[[kn:ವಿಕಿಪೀಡಿಯ]]
[[pam:Wikipedia]]
[[ka:ვიკიპედია]]
[[ks:विकिपीडिया]]
[[csb:Wikipedijô]]
[[kk:Уикипедия]]
[[kw:Wikipedya]]
[[sw:Wikipedia]]
[[ht:Wikipedya]]
[[ku:Wîkîpediya]]
[[lad:Vikipedia]]
[[krc:Википедия]]
[[lbe:Википедия]]
[[lo:ວິກິພີເດຍ]]
[[la:Wikipedia]]
[[lv:Vikipēdija]]
[[lb:Wikipedia]]
[[lt:Vikipedija]]
[[lij:Wikipedia]]
[[li:Wikipedia]]
[[ln:Wikipedia]]
[[jbo:uikipidias]]
[[lmo:Wikipedia]]
[[hu:Wikipédia]]
[[mk:Википедија]]
[[mg:Wikipedia]]
[[ml:വിക്കിപീഡിയ]]
[[mt:Wikipedija]]
[[mi:Wikipedia]]
[[mr:विकिपीडिया]]
[[arz:ويكيبيديا]]
[[mzn:ویکیپدیا]]
[[ms:Wikipedia]]
[[cdo:Wikipedia]]
[[mwl:Biquipédia]]
[[mdf:Википедие]]
[[mn:Википедиа]]
[[my:ဝီကီပိဒိယ]]
[[nah:Huiquipedia]]
[[na:Wikipedia]]
[[nl:Wikipedia]]
[[nds-nl:Wikipedia]]
[[ne:विकिपीडिया]]
[[new:विकिपिडिया]]
[[ja:ウィキペディア]]
[[nap:Wikipedia]]
[[no:Wikipedia]]
[[nn:Wikipedia]]
[[nrm:Viqùipédie]]
[[nov:Wikipedie]]
[[oc:Wikipèdia]]
[[mhr:Википедий]]
[[uz:Vikipediya]]
[[pa:ਵਿਕਿਪੀਡਿਆ]]
[[pag:Wikipedia]]
[[pnb:وکیپیڈیا]]
[[pap:Wikipedia]]
[[ps:ويکيپېډيا]]
[[km:វិគីភីឌា]]
[[pms:Wikipedia]]
[[tpi:Wikipedia]]
[[nds:Wikipedia]]
[[pl:Wikipedia]]
[[pnt:Βικιπαίδεια]]
[[pt:Wikipédia]]
[[kaa:Wikipedia]]
[[crh:Vikipediya]]
[[ksh:Wikkipedija]]
[[ro:Wikipedia]]
[[rmy:Vikipidiya]]
[[rm:Vichipedia]]
[[qu:Wikipidiya]]
[[ru:Википедия]]
[[sah:Бикипиэдьийэ]]
[[se:Wikipediija]]
[[sa:विकिपीडियः]]
[[sg:Wïkïpêdïyäa]]
[[sc:Wikipedia]]
[[sco:Wikipaedia]]
[[stq:Wikipedia]]
[[tn:Wikipedia]]
[[sq:Wikipedia]]
[[scn:Wikipedia]]
[[si:විකිපීඩියා]]
[[simple:Wikipedia]]
[[sd:وڪيپيڊيا]]
[[sk:Wikipédia]]
[[cu:Википє́дїꙗ]]
[[sl:Wikipedija]]
[[szl:Wikipedyjo]]
[[so:Wikipedia]]
[[ckb:ویکیپیدیا]]
[[srn:Wikipedia]]
[[sr:Википедија]]
[[sh:Wikipedia]]
[[su:Wikipédia]]
[[fi:Wikipedia]]
[[sv:Wikipedia]]
[[tl:Wikipedia]]
[[ta:விக்கிப்பீடியா]]
[[kab:Wikipedia]]
[[roa-tara:Uicchipèdie]]
[[tt:Wikipedia]]
[[te:వికీపీడియా]]
[[tet:Wikipédia]]
[[th:วิกิพีเดีย]]
[[tg:Википедиа]]
[[chr:ᏫᎩᏇᏗᏯ]]
[[ve:Wikipedia]]
[[tr:Vikipedi]]
[[tk:Wikipediýa]]
[[tw:Wikipedia]]
[[udm:Википедия]]
[[bug:Wikipedia]]
[[uk:Вікіпедія]]
[[ur:ویکیپیڈیا]]
[[ug:ۋىكىپېدىيە]]
[[vec:Wikipedia]]
[[vi:Wikipedia]]
[[fiu-vro:Vikipeediä]]
[[wa:Wikipedia]]
[[zh-classical:維基大典]]
[[vls:Wikipedia]]
[[war:Wikipedia]]
[[wo:Wikipedia]]
[[wuu:维基百科]]
[[ts:Wikipediya]]
[[yi:וויקיפעדיע]]
[[yo:Wikipedia]]
[[zh-yue:維基百科]]
[[diq:Wikipediya]]
[[zea:Wikipedia]]
[[bat-smg:Vikipedėjė]]
[[zh:维基百科]]

Revision as of 21:54, 13 May 2010

CHANGE IT BACK, NOW!!

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia&oldid=361971836"