Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "维基百科" in Chinese language version.
“While the “big three” properties remain consistent among worldwide and U.S. audiences, Wikipedia has emerged as a site that continues to increase in popularity, both globally and in the U.S.
That is question one on the membership application form of the Socialist Labour Party of America.……Though it can trace its history as far back as 1876, when it was known as the Workingmen's Party, no less an authority than Wikipedia pronounces it “moribund”.
|title= (帮助)The sheer volume of content […] is partly responsible for the site's dominance as an online reference. When compared to the top 3,200 educational reference sites in the US, Wikipedia is No. 1, capturing 24.3% of all visits to the category. Cf. Bill Tancer (Global Manager, Hitwise), "Wikipedia, Search and School Homework" 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2012-03-25., Hitwise,2007-03-01.
There is a certain mindset associated with unmoderated Usenet groups and mailing lists that infects the collectively-managed Wikipedia project: if you react strongly to trolling, that reflects poorly on you, not (necessarily) on the troll. If you attempt to take trolls to task or demand that something be done about constant disruption by trollish behavior, the other listmembers will cry "censorship," attack you, and even come to the defense of the troll.……The root problem: anti-elitism, or lack of respect for expertise. There is a deeper problem--or I, at least, regard it as a problem--which explains both of the above-elaborated problems. Namely, as a community, Wikipedia lacks the habit or tradition of respect for expertise. As a community, far from being elitist (which would, in this context, mean excluding the unwashed masses), it is anti-elitist (which, in this context, means that expertise is not accorded any special respect, and snubs and disrespect of expertise is tolerated). This is one of my failures: a policy that I attempted to institute in Wikipedia's first year, but for which I did not muster adequate support, was the policy of respecting and deferring politely to experts. (Those who were there will, I hope, remember that I tried very hard.)
The Wikipedia's open structure makes it a target for trolls and vandals who malevolently add incorrect information to articles, get other people tied up in endless discussions, and generally do everything to draw attention to themselves.
Online encyclopedia Wikipedia has added about 20 million unique monthly visitors in the past year, making it the top online news and information destination, according to Nielsen//NetRatings.
Larry Sanger describes the Citizendium project as a "progressive or gradual fork", with the major difference that experts have the final say over edits.
The sheer volume of content […] is partly responsible for the site's dominance as an online reference. When compared to the top 3,200 educational reference sites in the US, Wikipedia is No. 1, capturing 24.3% of all visits to the category. Cf. Bill Tancer (Global Manager, Hitwise), "Wikipedia, Search and School Homework" 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2012-03-25., Hitwise,2007-03-01.
The sheer volume of content (Wikipedia claims over 5.3 million entries, 1.6 million in English) is partly responsible for the site's dominance as an online reference. When compared to the top 3,200 educational reference sites in the U.S., Wikipedia is #1, capturing 24.3% of all visits to the category, according to Hitwise data.
Online encyclopedia Wikipedia has added about 20 million unique monthly visitors in the past year, making it the top online news and information destination, according to Nielsen//NetRatings.
The sheer volume of content […] is partly responsible for the site's dominance as an online reference. When compared to the top 3,200 educational reference sites in the US, Wikipedia is No. 1, capturing 24.3% of all visits to the category. Cf. Bill Tancer (Global Manager, Hitwise), "Wikipedia, Search and School Homework" 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2012-03-25., Hitwise,2007-03-01.
Wikipedians who edited at least 10 times since they arrived
The sheer volume of content (Wikipedia claims over 5.3 million entries, 1.6 million in English) is partly responsible for the site's dominance as an online reference. When compared to the top 3,200 educational reference sites in the U.S., Wikipedia is #1, capturing 24.3% of all visits to the category, according to Hitwise data.
The Wikipedia's open structure makes it a target for trolls and vandals who malevolently add incorrect information to articles, get other people tied up in endless discussions, and generally do everything to draw attention to themselves.
Wikipedia is not a dictionary, or a usage or jargon guide.
A topic is presumed to merit an article if it meets the general notability guideline below, and is not excluded under What Wikipedia is not.
維基百科不是發表原創研究或原創觀念的場所。（中文）
This means that all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation.
All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view. NPOV is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia and of other Wikimedia projects. This policy is nonnegotiable and all editors and articles must follow it.
There is a certain mindset associated with unmoderated Usenet groups and mailing lists that infects the collectively-managed Wikipedia project: if you react strongly to trolling, that reflects poorly on you, not (necessarily) on the troll. If you attempt to take trolls to task or demand that something be done about constant disruption by trollish behavior, the other listmembers will cry "censorship," attack you, and even come to the defense of the troll.……The root problem: anti-elitism, or lack of respect for expertise. There is a deeper problem--or I, at least, regard it as a problem--which explains both of the above-elaborated problems. Namely, as a community, Wikipedia lacks the habit or tradition of respect for expertise. As a community, far from being elitist (which would, in this context, mean excluding the unwashed masses), it is anti-elitist (which, in this context, means that expertise is not accorded any special respect, and snubs and disrespect of expertise is tolerated). This is one of my failures: a policy that I attempted to institute in Wikipedia's first year, but for which I did not muster adequate support, was the policy of respecting and deferring politely to experts. (Those who were there will, I hope, remember that I tried very hard.)
A talk page (also known as a discussion page) is a page which editors can use to discuss improvements to an article or other Wikipedia page.
“While the “big three” properties remain consistent among worldwide and U.S. audiences, Wikipedia has emerged as a site that continues to increase in popularity, both globally and in the U.S.
36% of online American adults consult Wikipedia It is particularly popular with the well-educated and current college-age students
That is question one on the membership application form of the Socialist Labour Party of America.……Though it can trace its history as far back as 1876, when it was known as the Workingmen's Party, no less an authority than Wikipedia pronounces it “moribund”.
Larry Sanger describes the Citizendium project as a "progressive or gradual fork", with the major difference that experts have the final say over edits.
Wikipedians who edited at least 10 times since they arrived
Wikipedia is not a dictionary, or a usage or jargon guide.
A topic is presumed to merit an article if it meets the general notability guideline below, and is not excluded under What Wikipedia is not.
This means that all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation.
All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view. NPOV is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia and of other Wikimedia projects. This policy is nonnegotiable and all editors and articles must follow it.
A talk page (also known as a discussion page) is a page which editors can use to discuss improvements to an article or other Wikipedia page.
維基百科不是發表原創研究或原創觀念的場所。（中文）
