Jump to content

Wikipedia: Difference between revisions

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Yamamoto Ichiro (talk | contribs)
47,174 edits
Revert to revision 54780707 using popups
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
WIKI!
<!--NOTE: Vandalism of this article is reverted in 30 seconds or less because this page is watched by legions of users and administrators. Vandals of this article are frequently given MUCH less tolerance and may be blocked immediately.

SO PLEASE THINK TWICE before deliberately doing something you know isn't wanted here.

Editors, please note that the "Language editions" subsection of this page is currently (as of March 2006) linked from the Main Page "languages" section. The link used on the Main Page is [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia#Language_editions]]. If the name of the subsection is changed, please update/redirect the link on the Main Page. Thanks.-->

{{Infobox_Website
|websitename = Wikipedia
|screenshot = [[Image:Www.wikipedia.org screenshot.png|250px|Detail of Wikipedia's multilingual portal at http://www.wikipedia.org. Here, the project's largest language editions are shown.]]
|commercial = No
|type = Online encyclopedia
|reg = Optional
|owner = [[Wikimedia Foundation]]
|author = [[Jimmy Wales]] and [[Larry Sanger]]
}}'''Wikipedia''' ([[IPA chart for English|IPA]]: [{{IPA|/ˌwɪkiˈpiːdi.ə/}}], [{{IPA|/ˌwiki-/}}], or [{{IPA|/ˌwɪkə-/}}]) is a [[international|global]] and [[multilingual]] [[World Wide Web|Web]]-based cooperative [[Free content|free-content]] [[encyclopedia]]. It exists as a [[wiki]], a type of [[website]] that allows visitors to edit its content; the word ''Wikipedia'' itself is a [[portmanteau]] of ''wiki'' and ''encyclopedia'' and is often abbreviated to '''WP''' by its users. Wikipedia is written collaboratively by [[volunteer]]s, allowing most articles to be changed by anyone with access to a computer, [[web browser]] and [[Internet]] connection.

The project began on [[January 15]], [[2001]] as a complement to the expert-written (and now defunct) [[Nupedia]], and is now operated by the [[non-profit organization|non-profit]] [[Wikimedia Foundation]]. Wikipedia has more than 3,800,000 articles in many languages, including more than 1,149,000 in the [[English Wikipedia|English-language version]].<!-- using {{NUMBEROFARTICLES}} would make things difficult for mirrors and doesn't work right with respect to article history! --> Since its inception, Wikipedia has steadily risen in popularity<ref>See plots at "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wikistats/EN/PlotsPngUsageVisits.htm Visits per day]", Wikipedia Statistics, [[January 1]], [[2005]]</ref> and has spawned several sister projects.<!-- and a paragraph here also-->

Wikipedia's most notable style policy is that editors are required to uphold a "[[Npov|neutral point of view]]", under which notable perspectives are summarized without an attempt to determine an [[objectivity (journalism)|objective]] truth.

Wikipedia's co-founder, [[Jimmy Wales]], has called Wikipedia "an effort to create and distribute a multilingual free encyclopedia of the highest possible quality to every single person on the planet in their own language."<ref>[[Jimmy Wales]], "[http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2005-March/038102.html Wikipedia is an encyclopedia]", [[March 8]], [[2005]], <wikipedia-l@wikimedia.org></ref> However, there has been controversy over Wikipedia's reliability and accuracy, with the site receiving criticism for its susceptibility to vandalism, uneven quality and inconsistency, [[systemic bias]], and preference of [[consensus]] or [[popularity]] over [[credential]]s. Nevertheless, its free distribution, constant updates, diverse and detailed coverage, and numerous multilingual versions have made it one of the most-used reference resources available on the Internet.

There are over 200 language editions of Wikipedia, around 130 of which are active. Fourteen editions have more than 50,000 articles each: [[English Wikipedia|English]] (the original), [[German Wikipedia|German]], [[French Wikipedia|French]], [[Polish Wikipedia|Polish]], [[Japanese Wikipedia|Japanese]], [[Dutch Wikipedia|Dutch]], [[Italian Wikipedia|Italian]], [[Swedish Wikipedia|Swedish]], [[Portuguese Wikipedia|Portuguese]], [[Spanish Wikipedia|Spanish]], [[Russian Wikipedia|Russian]], [[Chinese Wikipedia|Chinese]], [[Norwegian Wikipedia|Norwegian]] and [[Finnish Wikipedia|Finnish]]. Its German-language edition has been distributed on [[DVD|DVD-ROM]], and there are also proposals for an English DVD or paper edition. Many of its other editions are [[mirror (computing)|mirrored]] or have been [[fork (software development)|forked]] by other websites.

==Characteristics==
[[Image:Wikipedia-logo.png|thumb|The [[Wikipedia logo]].]]
Wikipedia's slogan is "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit," regardless of qualifications. It is developed using a type of [[computer software|software]] called a "[[wiki]]", a term originally used for the [[WikiWikiWeb]] and derived from the [[Hawaiian language|Hawaiian]] ''wiki wiki'', which means "quick". Jimmy Wales intends for Wikipedia ultimately to achieve a "''[[Encyclopædia Britannica|Britannica]]'' or better" level of quality and be published in print.

Although several other [[Internet encyclopedia project|encyclopedia projects]] exist or have existed on the [[Internet]], none have achieved Wikipedia's size or popularity. Traditional multilingual editorial policies and article ownership are sometimes used, such as the expert-written ''[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]'', the now-defunct [[Nupedia]], and the more casual [[H2G2|h2g2]] and [[Everything2]]. Projects such as Wikipedia, [[Susning.nu]], ''[[Enciclopedia Libre]]'' and [[WikiZnanie]] are other wikis in which articles are developed by numerous authors, and there is no formal process of review. Wikipedia has become the largest such encyclopedic wiki by article and word count. Unlike many encyclopedias, it has licensed its content under the [[GNU Free Documentation License]].

Wikipedia has a set of policies identifying types of information appropriate for inclusion. These policies are often cited in disputes over whether particular content should be added, revised, transferred to a sister project, or removed.

===Free content===
[[Image:Wikipedia growth.png|right|thumb|300px|Wikipedia's article count has grown quickly in several of the major language editions.]]
The [[GNU Free Documentation License]] (GFDL), the license through which Wikipedia's articles are made available, is one of many "[[copyleft]]" [[copyright]] licenses that permit the redistribution, creation of [[derivative work]]s, and commercial use of content, provided that its authors are attributed and this content remains available under the GFDL. When an author contributes original material to the project, the copyright over it is retained by them, but they agree to make the work available under the GFDL. Material on Wikipedia may thus be distributed multilingually to, or incorporated from, resources which also use this license.

Wikipedia's content has been mirrored and forked by hundreds of resources from database dumps. Although all text is available under the GFDL, a significant percentage of Wikipedia's images and sounds are not free. Items such as [[corporate logo]]s, song samples, or copyrighted news photos are used with a claim of [[fair use]].<ref>"[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_as_a_press_source_2005 Wikipedia as a press source 2005]", Wikipedia ([[March 28]], [[2005]])</ref> Wikipedia content has also been used in academic studies, books and conferences, albeit much more rarely, while Wikipedia was once used in a United States court case.<ref>[http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200216886.pdf Bourgeois ''et al'' v. Peters ''et al.'']<!-- can some clarify this citation reference style is correct?--></ref> For example, the [[Parliament of Canada]] website refers to Wikipedia's article on [[same-sex marriage]] in the "further reading" list of [[Civil Marriage Act]].<ref>"[http://www.parl.gc.ca/LEGISINFO/index.asp?Lang=E&Chamber=C&StartList=2&EndList=200&Session=13&Type=0&Scope=I&query=4381&List=toc C-38]", LEGISINFO ([[March 28]], [[2005]])</ref> Some Wikipedia users, or ''Wikipedians'', maintain (noncomprehensive) lists of such uses.<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_as_a_source Wikipedia as a source]</ref>



===Editing===
[[Image:Be bold.png|thumb|left|200px|"Be Bold" has become an unofficial slogan of Wikipedia.]]
[[Image:History comparison example.png|thumb|300px|Editors keep track of changes to articles by checking the difference between two revisions of a page, displayed here in red.]]
All visitors may edit Wikipedia's content, and registered users can create new articles and have their changes instantly displayed. Wikipedia is built on the expectation that collaboration among users will improve articles over time, in much the same way that [[open source|open-source software]] develops. Some of Wikipedia's editors have explained its editing process as a "[[social Darwinism|socially Darwinian]] [[Evolution|evolutionary]] process",<ref>"[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_sociology Wikipedia sociology]", Meta-Wiki, 23:30 [[March 24]], [[2005]]</ref> but this description is not accepted by most Wikipedians. {{citeneeded}}

Although many users take advantage of Wikipedia's [[openness]] to add nonsense to the encyclopedia, most deliberately disruptive edits and comments are quickly found and deleted by other editors. This real-time, collaborative model allows editors to update existing topics rapidly as they develop and to introduce new ones as they arise. However, this collaboration also sometimes leads to "[[edit war]]s" and prolonged disputes when editors do not agree.<ref>"[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_war Edit war]", Wikipedia ([[March 26]], [[2005]])</ref>

[[Image:Recentchanges.png|thumb|right|250px|The "recent changes" page shows the newest edits to the English Wikipedia. This page is often watched by users who revert vandalism. There is also a live recent changes [[Internet Relay Chat|IRC]] channel, [irc://irc.wikimedia.org/en.wikipedia #en.wikipedia].]]
Articles are always subject to editing, unless the article is protected for a short time due to the aforementioned vandalism or revert wars; Wikipedia does not declare any of its articles to be "complete" or "finished". The authors of articles need not have any expertise or formal qualifications in the subjects that they edit, and users are warned that their contributions may be "edited mercilessly and redistributed at will" by anyone who wishes to do so. Its articles are not controlled by any particular user or editorial group; decisions on the content and editorial policies of Wikipedia are instead made largely through [[consensus decision-making]] and, occasionally, by vote. [[Jimmy Wales]] retains final judgement on Wikipedia policies and user guidelines.<ref>"[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Power_structure Power structure]", Meta-Wiki, 10:55 [[April 4]], [[2005]]</ref>

Regular users often maintain a "watchlist" of articles of interest to them, so that they can easily keep tabs on all recent changes to those articles, including new updates, discussions, and vandalism. Most past edits to Wikipedia articles also remain viewable after the fact, and are stored on "edit history" pages sorted chronologically, making it possible to see former versions of any page at any time. The only exceptions are the entire histories of articles which have been deleted, and many individual edits which contain [[libel]]ous statements, copyright violations, and other content which could incur legal liability or be otherwise detrimental to Wikipedia; these edits may only be viewed by Wikipedia administrators.

==History==
{{main|History of Wikipedia}}

[[Image:NupediaLogo.jpg|thumb|left|250px|Wikipedia originally developed out of another encyclopedia project, Nupedia.]]

Wikipedia began as a complementary project for [[Nupedia]], a free online encyclopedia project whose articles were written by experts through a formal process. Nupedia was founded on [[March 9]], [[2000]] under the ownership of [[Bomis|Bomis, Inc]], a Web portal company. Its principal figures were [[Jimmy Wales]], Bomis [[CEO]], and [[Larry Sanger]], [[editor-in-chief]] for Nupedia and later Wikipedia. Nupedia was described by Sanger as differing from existing encyclopedias in being [[open content]], in not having size limitations, as it was on the [[Internet]], and in being free of bias, due to its public nature and potentially broad base of contributors.<ref name=QANupedia>Larry Sanger, "[http://web.archive.org/web/20000510132952/www.nupedia.com/interview.html Q & A about Nupedia]", Nupedia, March 2000</ref> Nupedia had a seven-step review process by appointed subject-area experts, but later came to be viewed as too slow for producing a limited number of articles. Funded by Bomis, there were initial plans to recoup its investment by the use of advertisements.<ref name=QANupedia/> It was initially licensed under its own Nupedia Open Content License, switching to the GNU Free Documentation License prior to Wikipedia's founding at the urging of [[Richard Stallman]].

On [[January 10]], [[2001]], Larry Sanger proposed on the Nupedia mailing list to create a wiki alongside Nupedia. Under the subject "Let's make a wiki", he wrote:

<blockquote> No, this is not an indecent proposal. It's an idea to add a little feature to Nupedia. Jimmy Wales thinks that many people might find the idea objectionable, but I think not. (…) As to Nupedia's use of a wiki, this is the ULTIMATE "open" and simple format for developing content. We have occasionally bandied about ideas for simpler, more open projects to either replace or supplement Nupedia. It seems to me wikis can be implemented practically instantly, need very little maintenance, and in general are very low-risk. They're also a potentially great source for content. So there's little downside, as far as I can see.<ref>{{cite news
|first=Larry
|last=Sanger
|title=Let's make a wiki
|date=[[January 10]], [[2001]]
|publisher=Internet Archive
|url=http://web.archive.org/web/20030414014355/http://www.nupedia.com/pipermail/nupedia-l/2001-January/000676.html
}}</ref> </blockquote>

Wikipedia was formally launched on [[January 15]], [[2001]], as a single English-language edition at http://www.wikipedia.com, and announced by Sanger on the Nupedia mailing list.<ref>{{cite news
|first=Larry
|last=Sanger
|title=Wikipedia is up!
|date=[[January 17]], [[2001]]
|publisher=Internet Archive
|url=http://web.archive.org/web/20010506042824/www.nupedia.com/pipermail/nupedia-l/2001-January/000684.html
}}</ref> It had been, from January 10, a feature of Nupedia.com in which the public could write articles that could be incorporated into Nupedia after review. It was relaunched off-site after Nupedia's Advisory Board of subject experts disapproved of its production model.<ref name=SangerMemoir>{{cite news | last=Sanger | first=Larry | title=The Early History of Nupedia and Wikipedia: A Memoir | date=April 18, 2005 | publisher=Slashdot | url=http://features.slashdot.org/features/05/04/18/164213.shtml}}</ref> Wikipedia thereafter operated as a standalone project without control from Nupedia. Its policy of "neutral point-of-view" was codified in its initial months, though it is similar to Nupedia's earlier "nonbias" policy. There were otherwise few rules initially. Wikipedia gained early contributors from Nupedia, [[Slashdot]] postings, and [[search engine]] indexing. It grew to approximately 20,000 articles, and 18 language editions, by the end of its first year. It had 26 language editions by the end of 2002, 46 by the end of 2003, and 161 by the end of 2004.<ref>"[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Multilingual_statistics Multilingual statistics]", Wikipedia, [[March 30]], [[2005]]</ref> Nupedia and Wikipedia coexisted until the former's servers went down, permanently, in 2003, and its text was incorporated into Wikipedia.

[[Image:WikipediaHomePage30March200.png|thumb|300px|right|Wikipedia's English edition on [[March 30]], [[2001]], two and a half months after its founding.]]

Wales and Sanger attribute the concept of using a wiki to [[Ward Cunningham]]'s WikiWikiWeb or [[Portland Pattern Repository]]. Wales mentioned that he heard the concept first from Jeremy Rosenfeld, an employee of Bomis who showed him the same wiki, in December 2000,<ref>Jimmy Wales, "[http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2005-April/039093.html Re: Sanger's memoirs]", [[April 20]], [[2005]],<wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org></ref> but it was after Sanger heard of its existence in January 2001 from Ben Kovitz, a regular at the wiki,<ref name=SangerMemoir/> that he proposed the creation of a wiki for Nupedia to Wales and Wikipedia's history started. Under a similar concept of free content, though not wiki-based production, the [[GNUpedia]] project existed alongside Nupedia early in its history. It subsequently became inactive, and its creator, [[free software|free-software]] figure [[Richard Stallman]], lent his support to Wikipedia.<ref>{{cite news | last=Stallman | first=Richard | title=The Free Encyclopedia Project | date=1999 | publisher=Free Software Foundation | url=http://www.gnu.org/encyclopedia/encyclopedia.html}}</ref>

Citing fears of commercial advertising and lack of control in a perceived English-centric Wikipedia, users of the [[Spanish Wikipedia]] forked from Wikipedia to create the ''[[Enciclopedia Libre]]'' in February 2002. Later that year, Wales announced that Wikipedia would not display [[advertising|advertisements]], and its website was moved to wikipedia.org. Various other projects have since forked from Wikipedia for editorial reasons, such as [[Wikinfo]], which abandoned "neutral point-of-view" in favor of multiple complementary articles written from a "sympathetic point-of-view".

The Wikimedia Foundation was created from Wikipedia and Nupedia on [[June 20]], [[2003]].<ref>Jimmy Wales: "[http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2003-June/010690.html Announcing Wikimedia Foundation]", [[June 20]], [[2003]], <wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org></ref> Wikipedia and its sister projects thereafter operated under this [[non-profit organization]]. Wikipedia's first sister project, "In Memoriam: September 11<!--DO NOT REFORMAT THIS DATE, IT IS IN QUOTATIONS--> Wiki", had been created in October 2002 to detail the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]]; [[Wiktionary]], a dictionary project, was launched in December 2002; [[Wikiquote]], a collection of quotations, a week after Wikimedia launched; and [[Wikibooks]], a collection of collaboratively-written free books, the next month. Wikimedia has since started a number of other projects, detailed below.

Wikipedia has traditionally measured its status by article count. In its first two years, it grew at a few hundred or fewer new articles per day; by 2004, this had accelerated to a total of 1,000 to 3,000 per day (counting all editions). The English Wikipedia reached its 100,000-article milestone on [[January 22]], [[2003]]<ref>"[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Press_releases/January_2003 Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, reaches its 100,000th article]", Wikimedia Foundation, [[January 21]], [[2003]]</ref>. Wikipedia reached its one millionth article, among the 105 language editions that existed at the time, on [[September 20]], [[2004]],<ref>"[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_press_releases/One_million_Wikipedia_articles_(int'l) Wikipedia Reaches One Million Articles]", Wikimedia Foundation, [[September 20]], [[2004]]</ref> while the English edition alone reached its 500,000th on [[March 18]], [[2005]].<ref>"[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Press_releases/March_2005 Wikipedia Publishes 500,000th English Article]", Wikimedia Foundation, [[March 18]], [[2005]]</ref> This figure had doubled less than a year later, with the millionth article in the English edition being created on [[March 1]], [[2006]]<ref>"[http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/English_Wikipedia_Publishes_Millionth_Article English Wikipedia Publishes Millionth Article]", Wikimedia Foundation, [[March 1]], [[2006]]</ref>; meanwhile, the millionth user registration had been made just 2 days before.

The Wikimedia Foundation applied to the [[United States Patent and Trademark Office]] to [[trademark]] ''Wikipedia®'' on [[September 17]], [[2004]]. The mark was granted registration status on [[January 10]], [[2006]]. Trademark protection was accorded by [[Japan]] on [[December 16]], [[2004]] and in the [[European Union]] on [[January 20]], [[2005]]. Technically a [[service mark]], the scope of the mark is for: "Provision of [[information]] in the field of general encyclopedic knowledge via the [[Internet]]".

There are currently plans to license the usage of the Wikipedia trademark for some products, such as books or DVDs.<ref>{{cite news
|first=Vipin
|last=Nair
|title=Growing on volunteer power
|date=December 5, 2005
|publisher=Business Line
|url=http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/ew/2005/12/05/stories/2005120500070100.htm
}}</ref> The [[German Wikipedia]] will be printed in its entirety by Directmedia, in 100 volumes of 800 pages each, beginning in October 2006, and publishing will finish in 2010.

==Software and hardware==
[[Image:Floridaserversfront1.jpg|250px|thumb|left|Wikipedia receives over 2000 page requests per second. More than 100 servers have been set up to handle the traffic.]]

Wikipedia is run by [[MediaWiki]]<!--for version see [[Special:Version]]--> [[free software]] on a cluster of dedicated servers located in [[Florida]] and four other locations around the world. MediaWiki is Phase III of the program's software. Originally, Wikipedia ran on [[UseModWiki]] by [[Clifford Adams]] (Phase I). At first it required [[CamelCase]] for links; later it was also possible to use double brackets. Wikipedia began running on a [[PHP]] [[wiki software|wiki engine]] with a [[MySQL]] [[database]] in January 2002. This software, Phase II, was written specifically for the Wikipedia project by [[Magnus Manske]]. Several rounds of modifications were made to improve performance in response to increased demand. Ultimately, the software was rewritten again, this time by Lee Daniel Crocker. Instituted in July 2002, this Phase III software was called MediaWiki. It was licensed under the [[GNU General Public License]] and used by all Wikimedia projects.

Wikipedia was served from a single server until 2003, when the server setup was expanded into a distributed [[multitier architecture]]. In January 2005, the project ran on 39 dedicated servers located in Florida. This configuration included a single master database server running [[MySQL]], multiple slave database servers, 21 web servers running the [[Apache HTTP Server|Apache]] software, and seven [[Squid cache]] servers. By September 2005, its server cluster had grown to around 100 servers in four locations around the world.

Page requests are processed by first passing to a front-end layer of [[Squid cache|Squid caching]] servers. Requests that cannot be served from the Squid cache are sent to two load-balancing servers running the [[Perlbal]] software, which then pass the request to one of the Apache web servers for page-rendering from the database. The web servers serve pages as requested, performing page rendering for all the Wikipedias. To increase speed further, rendered pages for anonymous users are cached in a filesystem until invalidated, allowing page rendering to be skipped entirely for most common page accesses. Wikimedia has begun building a global network of [[Squid cache|caching servers]] with the addition of three such servers in [[France]]. A new Dutch cluster is also online now. In spite of all this, Wikipedia page load times remain quite variable. The ongoing status of Wikipedia's website is posted by users at a [http://openfacts.berlios.de/index-en.phtml?title=Wikipedia_Status status page] on [[OpenFacts]].

== Funding ==
Wikipedia is funded through the [[Wikimedia Foundation]]. Its 4th Quarter 2005 costs were $321,000 with hardware making up almost 60% of the budget.<ref>{{cite web | title=Budget/2005 | work=Wikimedia Foundation | url=http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Budget/2005 | accessdate=2006-03-11}}</ref>

[[Bomis]], an online advertising company that hosts mostly adult-oriented web-rings, played a significant part in the early development of Wikipedia and the network itself.

==Evaluations==
{{further|[[Criticism of Wikipedia]]}}
Wikipedia has become increasingly controversial as it has gained prominence and popularity, with many critics alleging that Wikipedia's open nature makes it unauthoritative and unreliable, that it exhibits severe [[systemic bias]] and inconsistency, and that the [[group dynamics]] of its community are hindering its goals. Wikipedia has also been criticized for its use of dubious sources, its disregard for credentials, and its vulnerability to vandalism and special interest groups. Critics of Wikipedia include Wikipedia editors themselves, ex-editors, representatives of other encyclopedias, and even subjects of articles.

A recent survey sheds light on both the reliability and coverage of the Wikipedia. Fifty people assessed an article in an area of their expertise. Of those, 76% agreed or strongly agreed that the article was accurate, and 46% agreed or strongly agreed that it was complete. Of the 50, 18 compared the article they reviewed to the article on the same topic in the Encyclopedia Britannica. Thirty four percent of those people found the Britannica article more or substantially more accurate and 39% found the Britannica article to be more or substantially more complete. See[http://bpastudio.csudh.edu/fac/lpress/wikieval/] for detailed results of the survey.
===Reliability===
Wikipedia has been both praised and criticized for being open to editing by anyone. Proponents contend that open editing improves quality over time, while critics allege that non-expert editing undermines quality.

Wikipedia has been criticized for a perceived lack of reliability, comprehensiveness, and authority. It is considered to have no or limited utility as a [[reference work]] among many [[librarian]]s, [[Academia|academic]]s, and the [[editor]]s of more formally written encyclopedias. Many university lecturers discourage their students from using any encyclopedia as a reference in academic work, preferring primary sources instead.<ref>[http://www.emorywheel.com/media/storage/paper919/news/2006/04/21/News/Wide-World.Of.Wikipedia-1865022.shtml Wide World of WIKIPEDIA]</ref> A website called Wikipedia Watch has been created to denounce Wikipedia as having "…a massive, unearned influence on what passes for reliable information." <ref>[http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/ Wikipedia Watch]</ref>

Some argue that allowing anyone to edit makes Wikipedia an unreliable work. Wikipedia contains no formal [[peer review]] process for fact-checking, and the editors themselves may not be well-versed in the topics they write about. In a 2004 interview with ''[[The Guardian]]'', librarian Philip Bradley said that he would not use Wikipedia and is "not aware of a single librarian who would. The main problem is the lack of authority. With printed publications, the publishers have to ensure that their data are reliable, as their livelihood depends on it. But with something like this, all that goes out the window" (Waldman, 2004). Similarly, ''Encyclopædia Britannica'''s executive editor, Ted Pappas, was quoted in ''[[The Guardian]]'' as saying: "The premise of Wikipedia is that continuous improvement will lead to perfection. That premise is completely unproven."<ref name="Who">Simon Waldman, "[http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/news/0,12597,1335892,00.html Who knows?]", ''[[The Guardian]]'', [[October 26]], [[2004]].</ref> On [[October 24]], [[2005]], ''[[The Guardian]]'' published an article [http://technology.guardian.co.uk/opinion/story/0,16541,1599325,00.html "Can you trust Wikipedia?"] where a group of experts critically reviewed entries for their fields. Discussing Wikipedia as an academic source, [[Danah Boyd]] said in 2005 that "[i]t will never be an encyclopedia, but it will contain extensive knowledge that is quite valuable for different purposes".<ref>Danah Boyd, "[http://www.corante.com/many/archives/2005/01/04/academia_and_wikipedia.php Academia and Wikipedia]", [[Many-to-Many]], [[January 4]], [[2005]].</ref>

Academic circles have not been exclusively dismissive of Wikipedia as a reference. Wikipedia articles have been referenced in "enhanced perspectives" provided on-line in ''Science''. The first of these perspectives to provide a hyperlink to Wikipedia was "A White Collar Protein Senses Blue Light" (Linden, 2002), and dozens of enhanced perspectives have provided such links since then. However, these links are offered as background sources for the reader, not as sources used by the writer, and the "enhanced perspectives" are not intended to serve as reference material themselves.

Some critics have suggested that Wikipedia cannot justifiably be called an "encyclopedia", a term which (it is claimed) implies a high degree of reliability and authority that Wikipedia, due to its open editorial policies, may not be able to maintain. However, Wikipedia does meet all the criteria for the basic definition of the word ''encyclopedia''.

In a 2004 piece called "The Faith-Based Encyclopedia," former ''Britannica'' editor [[Robert McHenry]] criticized the wiki approach, writing,
<blockquote>
[h]owever closely a Wikipedia article may at some point in its life attain to reliability, it is forever open to the uninformed or semiliterate meddler… The user who visits Wikipedia to learn about some subject, to confirm some matter of fact, is rather in the position of a visitor to a public restroom. It may be obviously dirty, so that he knows to exercise great care, or it may seem fairly clean, so that he may be lulled into a false sense of security. What he certainly does not know is who has used the facilities before him.<ref>[[Robert McHenry]], "[http://www.techcentralstation.com/111504A.html The Faith-Based Encyclopedia]", [[Tech Central Station]], [[November 15]], [[2004]].</ref>
</blockquote>
In response to this criticism, proposals have been made to provide various forms of provenance for material in Wikipedia articles.<ref>"[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Provenance Wikipedia:Provenance]", Wikipedia ([[May 9]], [[2006]]).</ref> The idea is to provide ''source provenance'' on each interval of text in an article and ''temporal provenance'' as to its vintage. In this way a reader can know "who has used the facilities before him" and how long the community has had to process the information in an article to provide calibration on the "sense of security". However, these proposals for provenance are quite controversial. Aaron Krowne wrote a rebuttal article in which he criticized McHenry's methods, and labeled them "[[FUD]]," the marketing technique of "fear, uncertainty, and doubt."<ref>Aaron Krowne, "[http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/free_issues/issue_02/fud_based_encyclopedia/ The FUD-based Encyclopedia]", [[Free Software Magazine]], [[March 1]], [[2005]].</ref>

Former [[Nupedia]] editor-in-chief [[Larry Sanger]] criticized Wikipedia in late 2004 for having, according to Sanger, an "anti-elitist" philosophy of active contempt for expertise.<ref name="SangerElitism">Larry Sanger, "[http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/12/30/142458/25 Why Wikipedia Must Jettison Its Anti-Elitism]", [[Kuro5hin]], [[December 31]], [[2004]].</ref>

The English-language website also suffers from frequent timeouts, server errors and occasional [[downtime]] due to heavy user traffic. These problems have had a negative impact on Wikipedia's desired image as a fast and reliable source of information.

At the end of 2005, [[John Seigenthaler Sr. Wikipedia biography controversy|controversy erupted]] after journalist [[John Seigenthaler Sr.]] found that his biography had been written largely as a hoax about Seigenthaler. This led to the decision to restrict the ability to start articles to registered users.

===Coverage===
Wikipedia's editing process assumes that exposing an article to many users will result in accuracy. Referencing [[Linus's law|Linus' law]] of open-source development, Sanger stated earlier: "Given enough eyeballs, all errors are shallow."<ref>Larry Sanger, "[http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2001/9/24/43858/2479 Wikipedia is wide open. Why is it growing so fast? Why isn't it full of nonsense?]", Kuro5hin, [[September 24]], [[2001]].</ref> Technology figure [[Joi Ito]] wrote on Wikipedia's authority, "[a]lthough it depends a bit on the field, the question is whether something is more likely to be true coming from a source whose resume sounds authoritative or a source that has been viewed by hundreds of thousands of people (with the ability to comment) and has survived."<ref>[[Joi Ito]], "[http://joi.ito.com/archives/2004/08/29/wikipedia_attacked_by_ignorant_reporter.html#c014592 Wikipedia attacked by ignorant reporter]", Joi Ito's Web, [[August 29]], [[2004]].</ref> Conversely, in an informal test of Wikipedia's ability to detect misinformation, its author remarked that its process "isn't really a fact-checking mechanism so much as a voting mechanism", and that material which did not appear "blatantly false" may be accepted as true.<ref>Anonymous [[blog]]ger, "[http://www.frozennorth.org/C2011481421/E652809545/ How Authoritative is Wikipedia]", Dispatches from the Frozen North, [[September 4]], [[2004]].</ref>

Wikipedia has been accused of deficiencies in comprehensiveness because of its voluntary nature, and of reflecting the systemic biases of its contributors. ''Encyclopædia Britannica'' editor-in-chief Dale Hoiberg has argued that "people write of things they're interested in, and so many subjects don't get covered; and news events get covered in great detail. The entry on [[Hurricane Frances]] was five times the length of that on [[Chinese art]], and the entry on ''[[Coronation Street]]'' was twice as long as the article on [[Tony Blair]]."<ref name="Who" /> (As of December 2005, this is no longer the case.) Former Nupedia editor-in-chief Larry Sanger stated in 2004, "when it comes to relatively specialized topics (outside of the interests of most of the contributors), the project's credibility is very uneven."<ref name="SangerElitism" />

Wikipedia has been praised for making it possible for articles to be updated or created in response to current events. For example, the then-new article on the [[2004 Indian Ocean earthquake]] on its English edition was cited often by the press shortly after the incident. Its editors have also argued that, as a website, Wikipedia is able to include articles on a greater number of subjects than print encyclopedias may.<ref>"[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Replies_to_common_objections Wikipedia:Replies to common objections]", Wikipedia, 22:53 [[April 13]], [[2005]].</ref>

[[Microsoft Encarta]] has started to solicit comments from readers in attempt to improve the accuracy and timeliness of its encyclopedia. [http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/support/encartafeedback.aspx Encarta Feedback] allows any user to propose revisions for review by their staff.<ref>"[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2005-04-11/Encarta_editing Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2005-04-11/Encarta editing]", Wikipedia, [[April 11]], [[2005]].</ref>

The German computing magazine ''c't'' performed a comparison of ''[[Brockhaus Multimedial premium|Brockhaus Multimedial]]'', ''[[Encarta|Microsoft Encarta]]'', and Wikipedia in October 2004: Experts evaluated 66 articles in various fields. In overall score, Wikipedia was rated 3.6 out of 5 points ("B-"), ''Brockhaus Premium'' 3.3, and ''Microsoft Encarta'' 3.1.<ref>Michael Kurzidim: Wissenswettstreit. Die kostenlose Wikipedia tritt gegen die Marktführer Encarta und Brockhaus an, in: [[c't]] 21/2004, [[October 4]], [[2004]], S. 132-139.</ref> In an analysis of online encyclopedias, [[Indiana University system|Indiana University]] professors Emigh and Herring wrote that "Wikipedia improves on traditional information sources, especially for the content areas in which it is strong, such as technology and current events."<ref>William Emigh and Susan C. Herring, "[http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/wiki.pdf Collaborative Authoring on the Web: A Genre Analysis of Online Encyclopedias]", paper presented at the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004.</ref>. The [[journal]] [[Nature (journal)|Nature]] reported in 2005 that [[science]] articles in Wikipedia were comparable in accuracy to those in Encyclopedia Britannica. Wikipedia had an average of four mistakes per article; Britannica contained three. Of eight "serious errors" found — including misinterpretations of important concepts — four came from each source.<ref>{{cite news | title=Wikipedia survives research test | date=December 15, 2005 | work=BBC News | publisher=BBC | url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4530930.stm}}</ref>. On [[March 24]], [[2006]], Britannica provided a rebuttal labeling the study "fatally flawed". <ref>{{cite news | title=Journal Nature study "fatally flawed" says Britannica | date=[[March 24]], [[2006]] | work=WikiNews | publisher=Wikipedia Foundation | url=http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Journal_Nature_study_%27fatally_flawed%27%2C_says_Britannica}}</ref>.

===Community===
The [[m:The_Wikipedia_Community|Wikipedia community]] consists of users who are proportionally few, but highly active. Emigh and Herring argue that "a few active users, when acting in concert with established norms within an open editing system, can achieve ultimate control over the content produced within the system, literally erasing diversity, controversy, and inconsistency, and homogenizing contributors' voices."<ref>Emigh, ibid.</ref> Editors on [[Wikinfo]], a [[fork (computing)|fork]] of Wikipedia, similarly argue that new or controversial editors to Wikipedia are often unjustly labeled "[[Internet troll|troll]]s" or "problem users" and blocked from editing.<ref>"[http://www.wikinfo.org/wiki.php?title=Critical_views_of_Wikipedia Critical views of Wikipedia]", [[Wikinfo]], 07:28 [[March 30]], [[2005]].</ref> Its community has also been criticized for responding to complaints regarding an article's quality by advising the complainer to fix the article.<ref>Andrew Orlowski, "[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/07/23/wiki_fiddlers_big_book/ Wiki-fiddlers defend Clever Big Book]", [[The Register]], [[July 23]], [[2004]].</ref>

In a page on researching with Wikipedia, its authors argue that Wikipedia is valuable for being a social community. That is, authors can be asked to defend or clarify their work, and disputes are readily seen.<ref>"[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Researching_with_Wikipedia Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia]", Wikipedia ([[March 28]], [[2005]]).</ref> Wikipedia editions also often contain [[reference desk]]s in which the community answers questions.

===Awards===
Wikipedia won two major awards in May 2004<ref>"[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Trophy_box Trophy Box]", Meta-Wiki ([[March 28]], [[2005]]).</ref>: The first was a Golden Nica for Digital Communities, awarded by [[Prix Ars Electronica]]; this came with a 10,000 [[euro]] grant and an invitation to present at the PAE Cyberarts Festival in [[Austria]] later that year. The second was a Judges' [[Webby Awards|Webby award]] for the "community" category. Wikipedia was also nominated for a "Best Practices" Webby. In September 2004, the [[Japanese Wikipedia]] was awarded a Web Creation Award from the Japan Advertisers Association. This award, normally given to individuals for great contributions to the Web in Japanese, was accepted by a long-standing contributor on behalf of the project.
Wikipedia has received plaudits from sources including [[BBC News]], ''[[Washington Post]]'', ''[[The Economist]]'', ''[[Newsweek]]'', ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'', ''[[Science (journal)|Science]]'', ''[[The Guardian]]'', ''[[Chicago Sun-Times]]'', ''[[The Times]]'' (London), ''[[Toronto Star]]'', ''[[Globe and Mail]]'', ''[[The Financial Times]]'', ''[[Time Magazine]]'', ''[[Irish Times]]'', ''[[Reader's Digest]]'' and ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]''. Founder Jimmy Wales was named one of the 100 most influential people in the world by ''[[TIME Magazine]]'' in 2006.

===Authors===
During December 2005, Wikipedia had about 27,000 users who made at least five edits that month; 17,000 of these active users worked on the English edition.<ref>Paragraph's statistics taken from "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wikistats/EN/TablesWikipediansEditsGt5.htm Active wikipedians]" (Wikipedia Statistics, [[April 13]], [[2006]]).</ref> A more active group of about 4,000 users made more than 100 edits per month, over half of these users having worked in the English edition. According to Wikimedia, one-quarter of Wikipedia's traffic comes from users without accounts, who are less likely to be editors.<ref>"[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia Wikipedia]", Meta-Wiki, 08:02 [[March 30]], [[2005]].</ref>

Maintenance tasks are performed by a group of volunteer developers, stewards, bureaucrats, and administrators, which number in the hundreds. Administrators are the largest such group, privileged with the ability to prevent articles from being edited, delete articles, or block users from editing in accordance with community policy. Many users have been temporarily or permanently blocked from editing Wikipedia. Vandalism or the minor infraction of policies may result in a warning or temporary block, while long-term or permanent blocks for prolonged and serious infractions are given by [[Jimmy Wales]] or, on its English edition, an elected Arbitration Committee.

Former Nupedia editor-in-chief [[Larry Sanger]] has said that having the [[GFDL]] license as a "guarantee of freedom is a strong motivation to work on a free encyclopedia."<ref>[[Larry Sanger]], "[http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2001/7/25/103136/121 Britannica or Nupedia? The Future of Free Encyclopedias]", [[Kuro5hin]], [[July 25]], [[2001]].</ref> In a study of Wikipedia as a community, economics professor [[Andrea Ciffolilli]] argued that the low [[transaction cost]]s of participating in [[wiki]] software create a catalyst for collaborative development, and that a "creative construction" approach encourages participation.<ref>Andrea Ciffolilli, "[http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_12/ciffolilli/index.html Phantom authority, self-selective recruitment and retention of members in virtual communities: The case of Wikipedia]", [[First Monday (journal)|First Monday]] December 2003.</ref> Wikipedia has been viewed as a social experiment in [[anarchy (word)|anarchy]], [[democracy]], or [[communism]]. Its founder has replied that it is not intended as one, though that is a consequence.<ref>Jimmy Wales, "[http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-January/018735.html Re: Illegitimate block]", [[January 26]], [[2005]], <wikien-l@wikimedia.org>.</ref> Critics of Wikipedia have also viewed it as an [[oligarchy]] which is controlled primarily by its [[Wikipedia:Administrators|administrators]], [[Wikipedia:Stewards|stewards]], and [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats|bureaucrats]], or simply by a small number of its contributors. [[Daniel Brandt]] of [[Wikipedia Watch]] has referred to [[Jimmy Wales|Jimbo Wales]] as the "[[dictator]]" of Wikipedia; however, most [[Wikipedia:Wikipedians|Wikipedia users]] either do not consider Wales to be a dictator, or consider him to be one who rarely gives non-negotiable orders. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_an_oligarchy_or_a_dictatorship]

==In popular culture==
Wikipedia is parodied at several websites, including [[Encyclopedia Dramatica]] and [[Uncyclopedia]].

The [[May 7]], [[2005]] [[FoxTrot]] [[comic strip]] showed one character [[:Image:Foxtrot_wikipedia.jpg|appending]] his older sister to unflattering Wikipedia articles. In a similar joke, the web comic ''[[Penny Arcade (comic)|Penny Arcade]]'' also satirized Wikipedia with a [http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/12/16 comic strip] depicting [[Skeletor]] vandalizing the [[He-Man]] article.

On the [[March 1]], [[2006]] episode of ''[[The Colbert Report]]'', [[Arianna Huffington]] challenged host [[Stephen Colbert]] on his claim that he had invented the word "truthiness." She cited Wikipedia, claiming that he had merely "popularized" the term. Regarding her source, Colbert, in-character, responded: "Fuck them." [http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/player.jhtml?ml_video=59703&ml_collection=&ml_gateway=&ml_comedian=&ml_runtime=&ml_context=show&ml_origin_url=%2Fshows%2Fthe_colbert_report%2Findex.jhtml&ml_playlist=&lnk=]. On the [[May 9]], [[2006]], episode of ''The Colbert Report'', Colbert referred to Wikipedia as his source of information for research on [[Sigmund Freud]]. In his normal, [[deadpan]], sarcastic delivery, Colbert's segment "The Wørd" mocked Wikipedia's sometimes-questionable information with the screen posting "Yes, even the factual parts."

In 2006, popular knowledge of Wikipedia had reached a level such that "Wikipedia" began to be used as a generic term for an information source. Commenting to ''[[the New York Times]]'' on the demands on [[Central Intelligence Agency]] analysts to produce instant information, [[John McLaughlin]], former acting U.S. [[Director of Central Intelligence]], stated, "intelligence analysts end up being the Wikipedia of [[Washington, D.C.|Washington]]".<ref name=McLaughlin>[[Tim Weiner]], "Langley, We Have a Problem", [[New York Times]], [[14 May]] [[2006]]</ref> Previously, a review of a new television series about terrorists noted that the characters routinely gave detailed background of events in the history of Islam and stated, "no one, and I assume even terrorists, talks like a walking Wikipedia."<ref name="sleeping cell">Wajahat Ali, "[http://www.altmuslim.com/perm.php?id=1629_0_25_0_C Sleeping Cell]", altmuslim.com, [[16 January]] [[2006]]</ref> This is similar to the way the term "[[Google]] it" is used today to represent searching the internet for something.

An internet webcomic called applegeeks.com mentioned several times "Why spend money for education when wikipedia has the same information for free."

==See also==
<!-- Note: [[Wikipedia:Avoid self-references]] -->
* [[Internet encyclopedia project]]
* [[List of encyclopedias]]
* [[Open Site]]

==References==
<!-- To add a reference simply enclose the text you want to appear here inside a <ref></ref> pair in the correct place in the body of the article.-->
<div class="references-small"><references />
</div>

==Further reading==
{{sisterlinks|Wikipedia}}
*[[Wikipedia:Introduction|Introduction to Wikipedia]]
*[[Wikipedia:FAQ|Wikipedia FAQ]]
*Fernanda B. Viegas, Martin Wattenberg, and Kushal Dave, "[http://web.media.mit.edu/~fviegas/papers/history_flow.pdf Studying Cooperation and Conflict between Authors with ''history flow'' Visualizations]", CHI 2004 [[April 24]]&ndash;[[April 29]], [[2004]]. Preliminary report "[http://researchweb.watson.ibm.com/history/ History Flow]" available on the IBM website.
*[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia in academic studies|Wikipedia in academic studies]]
*[[Wikipedia:Press releases|Wikipedia press releases]]
*[[Wikipedia:Press coverage|Press coverage of Wikipedia]]
*[[Wikipedia:Why Wikipedia is not so great|Why Wikipedia is not so great]]
*[[Wikipedia:Replies to common objections|Replies to common objections]]
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wikistats/EN/Sitemap.htm Wikipedia statistics]
*[[Open Directory Project]]: [http://dmoz.org/Computers/Open_Source/Open_Content/Encyclopedias/Wikipedia/ Wikipedia]
*[[OpenFacts]]: [http://openfacts.berlios.de/index-en.phtml?title=Copies_of_Wikipedia_content Copies of Wikipedia content]
*[[SourceWatch]]: [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Wikipedia Wikipedia][http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-11-29-wikipedia-edit_x.htm]

==External links==
{{Spoken Wikipedia|Wikipedia.ogg|2005-06-25}}
*[http://www.wikipedia.org wikipedia.org], multi-lingual portal
*[http://en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org], [[English language]] edition
*[http://meta.wikipedia.org/ Meta-Wiki], policy-related and technical discussions regarding [[Wikimedia]]
*[http://www.wikimediafoundation.org Wikimedia Foundation], parent organization of Wikipedia
*[http://features.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/18/164213 Larry Sanger on the origins of Wikipedia] from Slashdot and ''Open Sources 2.0''
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User:Larry_Sanger/Origins_of_Wikipedia&oldid=39843351 Larry Sanger about the origins of Wikipedia]
*[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4502846.stm BBC article regarding Wikipedia flaws]
*[http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/story/0,3605,1546162,00.html Guardian UK article]
*[http://www.npost.com/interview.jsp?intID=INT00126 Interview with Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales]," nPost, [[November 1]], [[2005]].
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost Wikipedia Signpost], newspaper about the English Wikipedia
*[http://www.newsxs.com/en/search/?search=quick_search&word=Wikipedia&lang=any&qs=Go Wikipedia in the news]. Aggregated news and rss-feed. (Multilingual)
*[http://news.com.com/2061-11199_3-5983234.html?part=rss&tag=5983234&subj=news Why Wikipedia will survive the storm], from News.com
*[http://www.nature.com/news/2005/051212/pf/438900a_pf.html ''Nature'' comparison between Wikipedia and Britannica]
*[http://corporate.britannica.com/britannica_nature_response.pdf Britannica's response to Nature's study on Wikipedia]
*[http://www.wikinfo.org/wiki.php?title=Critical_views_of_Wikipedia Critical Review Of Wikipedia]
*[http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/index.cfm?fa=viewArticle&id=1361 Can Wikipedia Survive Its Own Success?], [[Wharton School]]
*[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/06/wikipedia_bio/ Who Owns Your Wikipedia Biography?], ''The Register''
*[http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/wikiwoo.htm The Wiki Watch]
*[http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Uncyclopedia] and [http://www.wickerpedia.org/ Wickerpedia], Wikipedia parodies
*[http://www.wired.com/news/columns/0,70670-0.html?tw=wn_index_3/ The Wikipedia FAQK], Q&A by Lore Sjöberg in Wired.
*[http://web.archive.org/web/20031202163536/en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page The Wikipedia Main Page from Dec 02,2003] (Internet Archive Wayback Machine)
*[http://web.archive.org/web/20021013055006/www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia This exact page from Dec 10, 2002] (Internet Archive Wayback Machine)
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_User Ideal Wikipedia User]

{{Wikimedia Foundation}}
{{featured article}}

<!--not very sure-->

[[Category:2000s fads]]
[[Category:2001 establishments]]
[[Category:Online encyclopedias]]
[[Category:Wikipedia|*]]
[[Category:Wikimedia projects|Encyclopedia, Wiki]]
[[Category:Web 2.0]]
[[Category:Websites]]
[[Category:Virtual communities]]
{{Link FA|it}}

[[af:Wikipedia]]
[[als:Wikipedia]]
[[am:ዊኪፔድያ]]
[[ang:Wicipǣdia]]
[[ar:ويكيبيديا]]
[[an:Biquipedia]]
[[roa-rup:Uichipedia]]
[[frp:Vuiquipèdia]]
[[ast:Uiquipedia]]
[[ay:Wikipedia]]
[[bm:Wikipedia]]
[[bn:উইকিপিডিয়া]]
[[zh-min-nan:Wikipedia]]
[[be:Вікіпэдыя]]
[[bs:Wikipedia]]
[[br:Wikipedia]]
[[bg:Уикипедия]]
[[ca:Viquipèdia]]
[[cv:Википеди]]
[[ceb:Wikipedya]]
[[cs:Wikipedie]]
[[co:Wikipedia]]
[[cy:Wicipedia]]
[[da:Wikipedia]]
[[de:Wikipedia]]
[[et:Vikipeedia]]
[[el:Βικιπαίδεια]]
[[es:Wikipedia]]
[[eo:Vikipedio]]
[[eu:Wikipedia]]
[[fa:ویکی‌پدیا]]
[[fo:Wikipedia]]
[[fr:Wikipédia]]
[[fur:Vichipedie]]
[[ga:Vicipéid]]
[[gv:Wikipedia]]
[[gl:Wikipedia]]
[[gu:વિકિપીડિયા]]
[[ko:위키백과]]
[[hy:Վիքիփեդիա]]
[[hi:िविकपीिडया]]
[[hr:Wikipedija]]
[[io:Wikipedio]]
[[ilo:Wikipedia]]
[[id:Wikipedia]]
[[ia:Wikipedia]]
[[os:Википеди]]
[[is:Wikipedia]]
[[it:Wikipedia]]
[[he:ויקיפדיה]]
[[jv:Wikipedia]]
[[kl:Wikipedia]]
[[kn:ವಿಕಿಪೀಡಿಯ]]
[[ka:ვიკიპედია]]
[[csb:Wikipedijô]]
[[kw:Wikipedia]]
[[sw:Wikipedia]]
[[ht:Wikipedia]]
[[ku:Wikipedia]]
[[lad:ויקיפידיה]]
[[la:Vicipaedia]]
[[lv:Vikipēdija]]
[[lb:Wikipedia]]
[[lt:Vikipedija]]
[[li:Wikipedia]]
[[ln:Wikipedia]]
[[jbo:uikiPEdi,as]]
[[lmo:Wikipedia]]
[[hu:Wikipédia]]
[[mk:Википедија]]
[[ml:വിക്കിപീഡിയ]]
[[mt:Wikipedija]]
[[mi:Wikipedia]]
[[mr:विकिपीडिआ]]
[[ms:Wikipedia]]
[[mo:Википедия]]
[[nah:Wikipedia]]
[[na:Wikipedia]]
[[fj:Wikipedia]]
[[nl:Wikipedia]]
[[nds-nl:Wikipedia]]
[[cr:ᐎᑭᐱᑎᔭ]]
[[ja:ウィキペディア]]
[[no:Wikipedia]]
[[nn:Wikipedia]]
[[nrm:Viqùipédie]]
[[oc:Oiquipedià]]
[[ng:Wikipedia]]
[[nds:Wikipedia]]
[[pl:Wikipedia]]
[[pt:Wikipédia]]
[[ro:Wikipedia]]
[[rmy:Vikipidiya]]
[[qu:Wikipidiya]]
[[ru:Википедия]]
[[war:Wikipedia]]
[[sc:Wikipedia]]
[[sco:Wikipaedia]]
[[sq:Wikipedia]]
[[scn:Wikipedia]]
[[simple:Wikipedia]]
[[sk:Wikipédia]]
[[sl:Wikipedija]]
[[so:Wikipedia]]
[[sr:Википедија]]
[[sh:Wikipedia]]
[[su:Wikipédia]]
[[fi:Wikipedia]]
[[sv:Wikipedia]]
[[tl:Wikipedia]]
[[ta:விக்கிபீடியா]]
[[tt:Wikipedia]]
[[th:วิกิพีเดีย]]
[[vi:Wikipedia]]
[[tpi:Wikipedia]]
[[chr:ᏫᎩᏇᏗᏯ]]
[[tr:Vikipedi]]
[[uk:Вікіпедія]]
[[uz:Vikipediya]]
[[vec:Wikipedia]]
[[fiu-vro:Vikipeediä]]
[[wa:Wikipedia]]
[[yi:‫װיקיפּעדיע]]
[[zh-yue:維基百科]]
[[bat-smg:Vikipedėjė]]
[[zh:维基百科]]

Revision as of 21:30, 23 May 2006

WIKI!

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia&oldid=54781024"