Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Kayyem case study wikipedia
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Kayyem case study wikipedia

818
views

Published on


0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
818
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • ( a free online English-language encyclopedia project whose articles were written by experts and reviewed under a formal process
  • , as the Wikipedians constantly go to update it.
  • There are some mistakes on their contents since it is open to every one and people could edit their articles. So the content is
  • Wikipedia manages controversial topics in a logical mannerWikipedia’s unbiased point of view policy makes it an excellent encyclopedia into gaining an understanding of the many controversial topics that might be discussed. Also, having credible people on wikipedia would grant the website’s readers a genuine view about people across the globe.
  • Transcript

    • 1. Sarah Kayyem
      Reham El Didi
      Lujein Ramiz
    • 2. What is Wikipedia?
    • When &Where?
      • Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales founded Wikipedia on 10th January,2001.
      • 6. It initially started as Nupedia
      • 7. Wikipedia prides itself on being a “neutral compilation of verifiable, established facts” and tries to maintain that through their five pillars.
    • What makes wikipedia so special?
      • It is free and available to everyone with unlimited access.
      • 8. Available in a variety of languages.
      • 9. It is up to date
      • 10. Variety of subjects
      • 11. Wikipedia prides itself on being a “neutral compilation of verifiable, established facts” and tries to maintain that through their five pillars.
    • Why is Wikipedia criticized so much?
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaADQTeZRCY
    • 12. Why is Wikipedia criticized so much?
      • Not 100% reliable.
      • 13. Any Wikipedia contributor can be anonymous
      • 14. Wikipedia has a bad reputation with educators; some see it as having low quality and unacceptable to be used in academic research.
    • Should material be posted by random contributors?
      No cost
      Faster correction of errors and constant update.
       
      More independence.
      Reliability and accuracy.
      Amateur Wikipedians from around the world constantly contribute, add and edit
    • 15. Wikipedians spend a good amount of their time, knowledge and time, receiving no pay, by volunteering to contribute to the growing Wikipedia database. The motivation behind these people has been greatly researched and narrowed down to the following four points.
      Who are the wikipedians?
    • 16. How does Wikipedia mediate disputes on sensitive or controversial topics?
      logical manner.
      unbiased point of view policy
      credible people
      Wikipedia’s Controversy
    • 17. Values
      Social
      Understanding:
      Career:
      The 4 Wikipedian Values
    • 18. User Factors
      Openness
      Computer Skills
      Motivation
      Knowledge Factors
      Type of Knowledge
      Peer Review
      Technology Factors
      Easy Usability
      Fast Access
      Flexible Structure
      Although Wikipedia might not be considered as a credible source HOWEVER it is built on many successful factors …
    • 19. There is no right answer
      Some say its logic and have the unbiased point of view policy
      Some claim its biased like “conservapedia.com”
      conservapedia.com clearly shows some examples of Wikipedia’s liberal bias, deceit, frivolous gossip, and blatant errors on etc.
       6) Is mediation likely to yield to unbiased results?