Sooner or later, as a modern-day \u00a0student,\u00a0you have to figure out where you stand on Wikipedia. \u00a0It\u2019s either something you depend on, something you avoid, or something you use but try not to acknowledge. \u00a0Where do you stand? \u00a0More important if you are a serious history major, how should the history profession adapt in this Wiki Age?<\/p>\n
The answers don\u2019t come easy anymore. \u00a0For years, most professors –especially crusty old history professors– warned students away from Wikipedia. \u00a0But now some are welcoming it. \u00a0William Cronon, a distinguished historian, used his term as president of the American Historical Association (AHA) to advocate for making Wikipedia better. \u00a0Check out Cronon\u2019s\u00a02012 editorial on the subject<\/a>. \u00a0He\u00a0makes some powerful points, but historian Timothy Messer-Kruse\u2019s dismal experience <\/a>with trying to improve a mediocre Wikipedia entry highlights some of the inherent problems with this crowd-sourced and surprisingly rigid online encyclopedia. \u00a0So, too, does Martha Saxton’s struggles<\/a> in trying to introduce more diverse women’s history elements to the male-dominated Wiki world. \u00a0Most recently, historian Stephen Campbell reports to the AHA about his challenges <\/a>in trying to live up to Cronon\u2019s call to action.<\/p>\n Wikipedia is just one of many recent experiments in what is often called, “crowd-sourcing.” That term refers to efforts that attempt to draw contributions of free labor from a large number of people via online platforms. \u00a0When crowd-sourcing works best, there is a real feeling of community achievement. \u00a0When it falls apart, it usually looks like a half-baked effort to exploit poorly trained volunteers.<\/p>\n Digital humanist Rebecca Frost Davis has a really good post<\/a> about the challenges of attempting to use crowd-sourcing in the classroom. \u00a0The\u00a0New York Times\u00a0<\/em>has also\u00a0detailed some notable recent efforts at crowd-sourcing in the corporate world, especially related to open source or open innovation projects. \u00a0See this first piece from 2009<\/a>\u00a0and then check out this column from 2011<\/a> that explores some ways that non-profits have been attempting both crowd-sourcing and crowd-funding endeavors.\u00a0Finally, there is a quirky but fun piece from\u00a0The Atlantic\u00a0<\/em> which reminds us that calling for volunteers is something that most definitely predates the Internet. \u00a0If time allows, also try to read this recent piece from summer 2014<\/a> that details how the\u00a0New York Times\u00a0<\/em>once attempted (unsuccessfully)\u00a0to update its motto with help from the admiring crowd.<\/p>\n Questions to Consider<\/strong><\/p>\n Is\u00a0the Isle of Wikipedia just a place where lazy students get stranded, or will it\u00a0become an increasingly fertile ground for serious scholars\u00a0who want to reach the widest possible audience. What\u2019s your opinion? \u00a0What has been your experience? \u00a0Feel free to comment and to share.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Sooner or later, as a modern-day \u00a0student,\u00a0you have to figure out where you stand on Wikipedia. \u00a0It\u2019s either something you depend on, something you avoid, or something you use but try not to acknowledge. \u00a0Where do you stand? \u00a0More important … Continue reading