The Wikipedia soap opera

I'm not going to belabor this Wikipedia thing. I'll tell you more later how this works out. Here is what has happened as I've worked with the edublog page (and my own name, which technically is Victoria Adams Davis but I found Victoria Davis via my Google RSS feed for my name.)

It seems that people should not create pages for themselves. If they are noteworthy, their community should create it and add it. That is where we as edubloggers have not done a very good job. We seem to look stuff up in Wikipedia -- do we edit and add?

The fastest way to get yourself deleted is to create it yourself. So, if someone is noteworthy, it is your job to add them.
  • After someone named IcecreamAntisocial took a knife to notable edubloggers striking out Josie Frasier, Miguel Guhlin, Will Richardson, and Alfred Thompson. This person did not leave a note on the talk page as should be practice when names are deleted as such.
So, I added back Will Richardson (he has enough citations for me to prove his notability) and I created a page for him. (Please add to it if you have FACTS.)

I got a note from a very helpful editor who showed me how to question the notability of an article, which I did. (You just type {{notability}} at the top of a page in the edit screen.) I received a very terse response that the person with the name Victoria Davis won the state teen pageant and thus deserves inclusion in Wikipedia. They have a project that they've created to add information on beauty pageants. She was also upset on my blog post and concerned that I didn't contact her.

Well, I did leave information on her talk pages and the project page, (no responses posted as of yet.)

So, here is what I've concluded:

1) I will reserve my thoughts on Wikipedia, this is still in progress.
I guess it took an "in your face" something like the use of my own name to make me really look at the mechanics of what is going on here. This is a good thing. I teach wikis, I should know more about Wikipedia.

2) I've posted some questions to the very helpful editor in Banglore who offered his help. (Talk about a flat world.) We'll see what he says.

3) Whether or not educators like Wikipedia, perhaps its flaws are because so many educators do not like wikipedia and have thus ignored it.

I ask you to join and become an editor who cares about adding fact to the subjects you care about. -- Start by watching the edublog page! (But do not add yourself, only add others that you believe you have enough proof that they are notable.)

4) You could put in your two cents on this issue if you are an editor and it hits you. Otherwise, I'll let you know.

5) Remember that the other editors are just like you and we all have to begin somewhere. Don't let others intimidate you, you have a right to be there too. Behave ethically and responsibly! I'm doing my best to do so, but I am a "beginner at Wikipedia."

Like I said, I am reserving judgment. I do not have the time now to "mess with this" as we say. I'm going to have to leave the pageants alone if my issues do not get this resolved and will just let my name be in wikipedia for a teenager who won one pageant -- that must be more notable than I?!

Honestly, at this point, I think neither of us should be included.

It is supposed to be contributions over an extended period of time - hardly the one year that either of us has contributed to our fields. That should be in Wikinews! (In fact a search for edublog in wikinews turns up NOTHING!) Which is more important, a pageant or an edublog award? Wikipedia should just be consistent and have the mechanism in place for it to be consistent, or it is worthless. Otherwise, information goes to the persistent and dogged. (But then again, it often has.)

Boy, we will have fun debating this one in computer science. Perhaps I'll record it!

OK, enough of that. I have to grade!

Popular Posts