Reviews for How Wikipedia Works: And How You Can Be a Part of it

The average rating for How Wikipedia Works: And How You Can Be a Part of it based on 2 reviews is 2 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2010-01-29 00:00:00 Robert Gilbert I think it's the book to be consulted for those who aim at making the most out of Wikipedia. I, personally, read it to be briefed about the whole concept and how it can used for educational purposes. Unfortunately, not much was said about educational uses. I find it interesting that the author agrees with the idea of not accepting Wikipedia as a valid resource in academia. She talked thoroughly about that. Another interesting piece of information I came across is the "Talk pages." I wasn't aware of this side of Wikipedia. "An article, in this context, is defined s a Wikipedia page that contains encyclopedic information. Technically, the article count only measures pages of content that are not dead end ... and are not redirects." (p. 5) "Articles vary widely in length, detail, and comprehensiveness." (p.7) Articles talk about different topics, including: traditional encyclopedia topics, people, places, fictional characters, media, companies and organizations, and computer software and hardware. "A dictionary definition alone isn't sufficient for a Wikipedia article. However, dictionary definitions are very welcome at Wiktionary, Wikimedia's free dictionary project." (p. 19) "Policies determine both the kinds of topics that are acceptable and the way in which those topics are treated." (p. 11) "No one in particular has the job of deciding whether an article is suitable for Wikipedia. Rather, contributors submit new pages to the site directly, and they go live immediately without intermediaries. Other contributors then review these articles." (p. 12) "/three policies are so central to Wikipedia's workings... Verifiability [reliable sources:], Nor Original Research [ideas and facts previously published:], and Neutral Point of View [objectivity:]." "Wikipedia developed in an atmosphere where wikis were already established as a particular kind of online community." (p. 45) "Discussion or talk pages are meant for discussion about articles and other pages. Nearly every page on Wikipedia has an attached, dedicated discussion page. ... Talk pages are important, socially and practically. They help strengthen content... Editors can mention possible problems, leave notes about current ongoing work on the article, and negotiate a way through conflicts on content." (p. 113)

Review # 2 was written on 2018-04-20 00:00:00 Calvin Dobbins This is a wide-ranging polemic about how academics need to embrace the open access movement for political reasons that relies on the theorists-du-jour than a practical guide on how the academic world needs to change with the times. As much as I enjoyed Hall's analysis of the issues with digital publishing being a shadow of print, I found parts of the book too theoretical. I would have preferred it if the book was a little more concise and could have done without the lengthy parts on the politics. Yes it is all tied together, but it could have been two books (one on the importance of the open access movement to the future of academics and one on the political foundations that steer the movement) instead of one and made more powerful arguments. I found myself disinterested in parts of the book and skipping ahead to pick up the thread of an argument on open access. Great notes and bibliography though. The book is worth skimming and reference for those in the open access fray.