Are Wikis too amateur, too flawed for academia?

This arguably dysfunctional community is extremely off-putting to some of the most potentially valuable contributors, namely, academics. Furthermore, there is no special place for academics, so that they can contribute in a way they feel comfortable with. As a result, it seems likely that the project will never escape its amateurism. Indeed, one might say that Wikipedia is committed to amateurism. In an encyclopedia, there’s something wrong with that.

Read Wikipedia and its ‘bad seed’: Is Web 2.0 a friend of true knowledge? from ZDNet. Previously from WNM: Are wikis a poor man’s peer review, or the natural home for new research?

Update: Wikia launches semi-private university wikis from Ars

Advertisements

2 Comments

Filed under Wiki

2 responses to “Are Wikis too amateur, too flawed for academia?

  1. Pingback: Academia 2.0. Does collaboration fit the academic mold? « What’s New Media?

  2. Pingback: Rise of the Amateur class « What’s New Media?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s