Make Wikipedia responsible
- por: Wikipedia Review
- destinatário: Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
Wikipedia was launched in 2001 as a side-project to help feed content into a reputable, stable encyclopedia (called Nupedia) that would give authoritative overview of the sum of human knowledge. Unfortunately, the lure of "open editing" and the "wiki culture" derailed that original goal, and Wikipedia no longer claims responsibility for the ideals of reputability and stability. It merely seeks to barrel headlong forward, collecting information from anyone, with any agenda, with any point of view or bias. And it can change for the worse -- and does -- at any moment. Academic studies (e.g., one at the University of Minnesota) have shown that the probability of finding an article with "damaged" information is ever increasing, not decreasing, over time.
Almost on a weekly basis now, one can read in the mainstream press about how Wikipedia has libeled someone, or defamed an organization, or allowed terrorist groups, pedophiles, religious institutions, or government agencies to push an agenda within Wikipedia's pages.
And what is the response of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. that oversees the Wikipedia encyclopedia? It is almost entirely "hands off" on content issues, while simultaneously "hands on" with regards to building budget and revenues for the Foundation. Shouldn't an educational charity care more about content issues than about fund raising?
It is time that this irresponsible stewardship of global knowledge stops.
We here, the undersigned, pledge to communicate with our friends, colleagues, educators, opinion leaders, government officials, or the Wikimedia Foundation itself, that we call for a return to the original goals of the Wikipedia project -- that it merely act as a content feeder for more reputable, more responsible (i.e., resources that do *not* hide behind the loose protections of Section 230 of the U.S. Communications Decency Act) compendiums of human knowledge. It is also our own responsibility to launch, nurture, and promote these new, more responsible destinations of information.
Almost on a weekly basis now, one can read in the mainstream press about how Wikipedia has libeled someone, or defamed an organization, or allowed terrorist groups, pedophiles, religious institutions, or government agencies to push an agenda within Wikipedia's pages.
And what is the response of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. that oversees the Wikipedia encyclopedia? It is almost entirely "hands off" on content issues, while simultaneously "hands on" with regards to building budget and revenues for the Foundation. Shouldn't an educational charity care more about content issues than about fund raising?
It is time that this irresponsible stewardship of global knowledge stops.
We here, the undersigned, pledge to communicate with our friends, colleagues, educators, opinion leaders, government officials, or the Wikimedia Foundation itself, that we call for a return to the original goals of the Wikipedia project -- that it merely act as a content feeder for more reputable, more responsible (i.e., resources that do *not* hide behind the loose protections of Section 230 of the U.S. Communications Decency Act) compendiums of human knowledge. It is also our own responsibility to launch, nurture, and promote these new, more responsible destinations of information.
We the undersigned, while collectively very impressed with the volume and scope of subjects that Wikipedia covers, want a better reference resource than Wikipedia. Knowledge management requires careful attention to content issues, and in our opinion, the Wikimedia Foundation is scarcely addressing the very important content problems that face its primary product, Wikipedia. Indeed, many of the Foundation's staff and board members reject the notion that content management is within their remit, or even deny that any serious problems exist.
After nearly 10 years, Wikipedia is not "always improving" as is often falsely claimed by its key stakeholders. It is getting worse. Measurably worse -- as multiple academic studies have demonstrated quantitatively.
Now is the time, Wikimedia Foundation. Your ship is severely listing. If you cannot bail out your own project, then we will, taking your cargo and moving it elsewhere where it will be polished, improved, repaired, and managed properly. Humanity and posterity deserve no less.
assinar petiçãoassinar petiçãoAfter nearly 10 years, Wikipedia is not "always improving" as is often falsely claimed by its key stakeholders. It is getting worse. Measurably worse -- as multiple academic studies have demonstrated quantitatively.
Now is the time, Wikimedia Foundation. Your ship is severely listing. If you cannot bail out your own project, then we will, taking your cargo and moving it elsewhere where it will be polished, improved, repaired, and managed properly. Humanity and posterity deserve no less.
Ver mais petições:
O seu JavaScript está desativado. Sem ele, nosso site pode não funcionar corretamente.
ao assinar, você aceita o termos de serviço da Care2 Você pode gerenciar suas assinaturas de e-mail a qualquer momento.
Está tendo algum problema?? Avise-nos.