Ever since I first began using the Internet, Wikipedia has always been one (if not the) main site I’ve looked to for information regarding everything from psychological disorders to TV shows to my favorite albums.  99% of all questions I’ve had on a subject can be easily found at Wikipedia; and if not, its links and references are a great place to find further readings.  Rarely have I given thought to the validity of an article on Wikipedia, usually believing that the editors and writers are accurate and trustworthy enough to hold their pages to a level of fact.  With these previous experiences, I went into a historical Wikipedia article and evaluated how it’s edited and upkept, and if it’s reputable.

Acre, Israel was the page I choose.  An old city that came to prevalence during the Crusades, Acre itself is an enormous historical artifact of the Holy Land and the wars that raged around the area for centuries.  The first thing I did when I got to the page was click the ‘View History‘ button on the top of the page.  There, every single edit that has ever been done to the page is kept on record, dating all the way back to the page’s creation on September 27th, 2001.  Back then, the page only contained 7611 bytes, which equals only about 3000 words.  Jump ahead to the latest edit, and the page has 36380 bytes worth of pictures and text; an incredible increase.  Every edit made also shows if it was kept in the article, or eventually cut out after it was posted.  A large majority of the edits stayed in place, and many having surveys between the writers and editors and other contributors on if the new information is accurate or where it should be moved in the article.  In my time with the article, I found that a lot of care has gone into making the Wikipedia page for Acre a historically accurate and detailed article that contains a wealth of useful and interesting information.

While looking through the article, I came to the ‘Talk‘ tab on the top of the page, and when opening it, found an article ranking and importance system.  I’d never been aware of this feature, and had no previous knowledge of tiers of articles other than the ‘Featured Article‘ list on the front page of Wikipedia.  Acre, Israel for example, has a ranking of a ‘B’ and is of high importance to the Israel portal of WikiProject (the editorial and writing team who oversee Wikipedia and other WikiMedia).  Other pages I looked into were Radiohead’s Album Kid A, and has a ranking of ‘FA’ and a high importance to the Alternative Music portal; and the page for the anime Neon Genesis Evangelion, which is in the process of being raised for ‘C’ to ‘B’ ranking and is of high importance to the Anime portal. Here’s an example of the ranking system among geology articles, with grades ranging from ‘A’ to ‘Stub.’  Rankings are given based on the article’s citations, structure, grammar, accuracy, supporting material, and accessibility.  This is just another way to find out if an article is accurate and worth reading.  I’ve always loved Wikipedia and continue to use it almost religiously.  It might not to the most accurate or in depth source available, but it come pretty darn close.  With Wikipedia’s increased emphasis on accurately written and edited articles, and less of the ‘anyone can add information’ attitude that it was previously known (and somewhat maligned) for, I see it as an ever-growing bed of knowledge that in every way should be taken advantage of.