Knowledge (XXG)

:Credibility - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

42: 88:, compiling the results of international third-party assessments across various disciplines. The consensus: the encyclopedia is as accurate as other encyclopedias. And as Cathy Davidson, Professor of Interdisciplinary Studies at Duke University, pointed out in "We Can't Ignore the Influence of Digital Technologies" ( 95:
A quote from a book, even by a supposed highly respected source, can be meaningless. A great many legitimate writers refer to things as they see or believe them to be. If called upon, they can properly say it was a minor reference, based on the best available information at the time, and said without
134:(Jimmy Wales) conceded that Knowledge (XXG)'s quality may not be up to the level of Britannica. He also stated that the 236-year-old encyclopedia "had better watch out". Knowledge (XXG) is proposing to implement editorial controls soon that Wales thinks will put it on par with Britannica. 151:
A dozen years later, Britannica had stopped printing. Knowledge (XXG) had grown much bigger. "Stable versions" had not become important, but the community had developed more complex processes and structures. It was attracting academic attention as a subject of study.
126:, conceded that at its best, some Knowledge (XXG) entries reflect the collective wisdom of many contributors. He also stated: "The problem with an effort like that is that at other times, it may reflect just the wisdom -- or lack of wisdom -- of the last contributor." 139:"That kind of quality is important, and we do believe we can reach that kind of quality within a year," he (Wales) said. Within a few weeks, Wales plans to propose a review process that would essentially allow certain articles to be flagged as " 147:. The way Knowledge (XXG) works now, anything can be edited almost endlessly. Editing could continue, but a new layer would be added that identified certain entry versions as attaining an editorial standard. 96:
malice. Encyclopedias only quote these opinions or references if they were documented with proofs and a minimum of one other verifiable supporting source for that documentation.
81:" or uninformed individual could easily overwrite it, with or without a malicious agenda. Knowledge (XXG) addresses this concern with internal, continuous review of new edits. 77:
has improved during its lifetime. Knowledge (XXG) allows anyone to edit its contents and this can undermine its credibility. An illustrious professor could post content and a "
28: 188: 92:, March 23, 2007), unlike comparable print sources, Knowledge (XXG) errors can be corrected and often are in a matter of hours after publication. 144: 57:
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Knowledge (XXG) contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
58: 183: 156: 140: 100: 85: 123: 168: 62: 106:
The question of Knowledge (XXG) credibility has been raised by a number of sources. A September 8, 2004
112: 108: 50: 78: 17: 177: 65:. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. 131: 119: 169:
http://teachinghistory.org/digital-classroom/ask-a-digital-historian/23863
36: 84:
Encyclopedia editors also examine accuracy in the entry
27:"WP:CREDIBLE" redirects here. Not to be confused with 29:Knowledge (XXG):Credible claim of significance 159:was implemented to stabilize a few articles. 8: 99:Numerous problems remain, including that of 143:" so they could be included in print or 59:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies or guidelines 7: 189:Knowledge (XXG) editorial validation 103:by those who edit with an agenda. 63:thoroughly vetted by the community 25: 40: 34:Essay on editing Knowledge (XXG) 157:Knowledge (XXG):Pending changes 141:Knowledge (XXG):Stable versions 101:Knowledge (XXG):Disinformation 86:Reliability of Knowledge (XXG) 1: 90:Chronicle of Higher Education 124:Encyclopedia Britannica Inc. 205: 26: 115:included the following: 18:Knowledge (XXG):CREDIBLE 184:Knowledge (XXG) essays 61:, as it has not been 73:Knowledge (XXG)'s 71: 70: 16:(Redirected from 196: 44: 43: 37: 21: 204: 203: 199: 198: 197: 195: 194: 193: 174: 173: 165: 145:CD-ROM versions 122:, president of 109:Washington Post 67: 66: 41: 35: 32: 23: 22: 15: 12: 11: 5: 202: 200: 192: 191: 186: 176: 175: 172: 171: 164: 163:External links 161: 149: 148: 136: 135: 128: 127: 69: 68: 56: 55: 47: 45: 33: 24: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 201: 190: 187: 185: 182: 181: 179: 170: 167: 166: 162: 160: 158: 153: 146: 142: 138: 137: 133: 130: 129: 125: 121: 118: 117: 116: 114: 111: 110: 104: 102: 97: 93: 91: 87: 82: 80: 76: 64: 60: 54: 52: 46: 39: 38: 30: 19: 154: 150: 107: 105: 98: 94: 89: 83: 74: 72: 48: 75:credibility 49:This is an 178:Categories 120:Jorge Cauz 155:In 2014, 113:article 132:Wales 79:troll 51:essay 180:: 53:. 31:. 20:)

Index

Knowledge (XXG):CREDIBLE
Knowledge (XXG):Credible claim of significance
essay
Knowledge (XXG)'s policies or guidelines
thoroughly vetted by the community
troll
Reliability of Knowledge (XXG)
Knowledge (XXG):Disinformation
Washington Post
article
Jorge Cauz
Encyclopedia Britannica Inc.
Wales
Knowledge (XXG):Stable versions
CD-ROM versions
Knowledge (XXG):Pending changes
http://teachinghistory.org/digital-classroom/ask-a-digital-historian/23863
Categories
Knowledge (XXG) essays
Knowledge (XXG) editorial validation

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.