3 Sep 2009 13:33
[WMUK Schools Project] Important matter
nevio carlos de alarcão <nevinhoalarcao <at> gmail.com>
2009-09-03 11:33:16 GMT
2009-09-03 11:33:16 GMT
All,
I think it is important to be addressed in school presentantions, do you?
Wikipedia notes with different colors the credibility of information
(published by the Brazilian media)
"It is an attempt to overcome the Achilles' heel of Wikipedia: the end of the year, the popular online encyclopedia, is going to start out with different colors that the text has been changed or added recently. Each color represents a level of credibility, assigned according to the author of the text and the time it remains on the page.
The new feature is optional and each user can decide if you want to see the color code or not.
The text has been inserted or changed is marked with a background color that matches the degree of credibility of the author - and which is in turn determined by other issues already made by the author and by the time these issues have remained online.
For example, the words entered by a user who has a history of credibility (being new to Wikipedia or because the text entered at other times not long survive) will have a deep-orange color. The text of a user in good standing has a white background - and there are many colors in between. The tool also takes into account the reputation of the various users who may have edited the same passage of text.
If a text long-time online, they tend to evolve into the background white. The logic is that if it remains untouched on the page - and have therefore survived the scrutiny of many users of Wikipedia - the information is trustworthy.
The fact that the information on Wikipedia can be changed by anyone has been the trump card of the free: allowed to grow to over nine million articles in multiple languages and made it a frequent stop for those looking for background information.
But it is precisely this factor that is the major weakness of Wikipedia, by making often arise errors and inaccuracies in the entries - both intentionally and unintentionally.
Recently, the managing of Wikipedia announced that, in line with what was happening in the German Wikipedia, information about people who are still alive must now be reviewed by reputable users. This mandatory review is seen by some users as a betrayal of the principle of freedom of issue that is behind the founding of Wikipedia.
A new feature of the color codes will be implemented through a tool called WikiTrust, which was already available for those who would use other sites on the same platform that Wikipedia (the technology platform from Wikipedia can be used by anyone to create a website style wiki, or that can be edited by any user). The WikiTrust is developed by researchers at the University of California, USA"
--
{+}Nevinho
I think it is important to be addressed in school presentantions, do you?
Wikipedia notes with different colors the credibility of information
(published by the Brazilian media)
"It is an attempt to overcome the Achilles' heel of Wikipedia: the end of the year, the popular online encyclopedia, is going to start out with different colors that the text has been changed or added recently. Each color represents a level of credibility, assigned according to the author of the text and the time it remains on the page.
The new feature is optional and each user can decide if you want to see the color code or not.
The text has been inserted or changed is marked with a background color that matches the degree of credibility of the author - and which is in turn determined by other issues already made by the author and by the time these issues have remained online.
For example, the words entered by a user who has a history of credibility (being new to Wikipedia or because the text entered at other times not long survive) will have a deep-orange color. The text of a user in good standing has a white background - and there are many colors in between. The tool also takes into account the reputation of the various users who may have edited the same passage of text.
If a text long-time online, they tend to evolve into the background white. The logic is that if it remains untouched on the page - and have therefore survived the scrutiny of many users of Wikipedia - the information is trustworthy.
The fact that the information on Wikipedia can be changed by anyone has been the trump card of the free: allowed to grow to over nine million articles in multiple languages and made it a frequent stop for those looking for background information.
But it is precisely this factor that is the major weakness of Wikipedia, by making often arise errors and inaccuracies in the entries - both intentionally and unintentionally.
Recently, the managing of Wikipedia announced that, in line with what was happening in the German Wikipedia, information about people who are still alive must now be reviewed by reputable users. This mandatory review is seen by some users as a betrayal of the principle of freedom of issue that is behind the founding of Wikipedia.
A new feature of the color codes will be implemented through a tool called WikiTrust, which was already available for those who would use other sites on the same platform that Wikipedia (the technology platform from Wikipedia can be used by anyone to create a website style wiki, or that can be edited by any user). The WikiTrust is developed by researchers at the University of California, USA"
--
{+}Nevinho
--
{+}Nevinho
_______________________________________________ Schools-project-l mailing list Schools-project-l <at> wikimedia.org.uk http://wikimedia.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/schools-project-l_wikimedia.org.uk
RSS Feed