웹2.0을 넘어 웹3.0으로

Wikipedia has revolutionized the world by decentralizing information. For individualists, wikipedia embodies the inherent success of individualism. For those whom fear decentralization, wikipedia embodies the growing lawlessness. This is truly a matter of perspective and interpretation. Yet I still believe that the fears of wikipedia are inflated. Allow me to elaborate.

Central Charges Against Wikipedia

The central charge against the open-source editing of wikipedia is the potential of inaccurate information. While it is true that there is potential, having potential does not inherently mean Wikipedia is full of inaccuracies. Any vandalism that occurs is quickly removed and pointed out.

In 2006 for example, staffers for Rep. Martin Meehan (D-Mass.) and officials from the National Institute on Drug Abuse were removing criticism from their respective wikipedia articles. When the articles were fixed, more criticism was included, this time pointing out their attempts at removal of criticism.

In another case of vandalism, someone continually replaces George W. Bush’s photograph with a picture of a giant penis; however, it is continually corrected in less than five minutes. Meanwhile, more subtle vandalism is repaired in a few hours (still remarkably quick compared to a normal encyclopedia that has to issue a correction in another book, often never obtained by owners of the encyclopedia).

If you still have doubts, consider than in 2005 the journal Nature compared scientific articles in wikipedia and the Encyclopedia Britannica for accuracy. Each article was sent to panels of experts in the appropriate field. The average number of errors for each wikipedia article was four parts per entry, only one behind Encyclopedia Britannica’s average of three parts per entry. Then consider the amount of articles each contains. Wikipedia boasts 1.7 million English articles, with 6 million total; Encyclopedia Britannica does not even approach 100,000. That is quite good accuracy for the volume of articles produced.

Wikipedia's Secret to Success

What is wikipedia’s secret to success? They have formed an individualistic community where anyone can edit any article.

What prevents the majority of people from intentionally sabotaging the project to promote their ideological views? A market-based system of reputation. When you post quality information, the community praises you; when you post inaccurate information, you are shamed. As a result, wikipedians strive to produce quality articles.

Wales, the founder, has a laissez faire philosophy on regulation. The community works out its own issues. Pro-lifers and pro-choicers have found a compromise on the wording of the abortion article; mainland Chinese and Taiwanese have done the same.

In fact, when the Chinese government censored wikipedia and demanded censorship, Wales let the Chinese contributors handle it. After all, it was against wikipedia’s philosophy (besides being impractical) to censor information when it could be easy re-added. Eventually, China uneasily unblocked wikipedia. Another case of the individuals solving the problem themselves instead of using regulation.

Wikipedia continues striving to form an individualistic community where diverse viewpoints are respected as each side works toward mutual compromise in creating a neutral article.