Wikipedia and Modern Day Sourcing

Part One:

After looking at the stub categories on Wikipedia, which say they need improving, I noticed a trend. A lot of the ones that need improving are topics of pop culture from an earlier time period (i.e. 1950s German film stubs) is something very specific about the pop culture during period in time. There are other topics like this that need improving as well. Wikipedia organizes their information numerically then alphabetically which makes it easier for a user to search through the website. 

I searched for the following words:

Editing

Wikipedia: How to Edit A Page

Public Discourse

Audience

Debate

Discourse

Communications

Nonverbal Communication

Style (manner of address)

Context (language use)

Interpersonal Communication

Message

I found that most words that I thought of that connected to public discourse on Wikipedia turned out to need improvement in some type of form or redirect the reader to a similar word. The word editor redirects to editing, which I found to be a natural connection because the page describes editing in various types of mediums and what the people who work with those mediums are called. Within that entry there are other words that redirect to connected phrases. For example, “Technical Writing” is a part of the editing page and Wiki suggests you see “technical writing” and “technical communication.” I found it helpful that the pages suggest words that may be connected to or that embody a word that may be too broad to begin with. This can help aid in searching for users. Wikipedia: How to Edit a Page is the next word I looked into, which is also linked to the Wikipedia Editing Policy. The embedded links in these posts were extremely helpful. Then I thought I would Wikipedia “public discourse” in order to see what words or links Wikipedia would suggest. What was interesting there is that Wikipedia directed me to “public sphere” instead. This meant that the person who composed the page felt that the phrase public discourse focused more on the “area” than the “communication” aspects of the word.  This word had 42 references, however most of the article’s information came from Jurgen Habermas’ theory. There is a section on rhetorical public sphere but not until toward the bottom. Audience, debate, discourse, nonverbal communication, style and message are words that are under the list of articles that need improvement as cited by Wikipedia.  There is a box that says that this article needs improvement by adding citations to reliable sources, which may mean that the current pages are incomplete or not completely true.

Part Two:

I chose to analyze the Wikipedia article on Leo Igwe, who is a Nigerian human rights advocate who is known for his campaigns against and documentation of child witchcraft. As part of the reliable sources of Wikipedia, a scholarship source is considered reliable if it is a theses written as part of requirements for a PhD, and Igwe’s research on child witchcraft is for his PhD research. The article cites his work as a main portion of the article since his research is a big part of his life. In accordance with Wikipedia, that makes that portion of the article reliable. However, there are other parts of the article, such as the ‘early life’ section that may be questionable. The reliable sources page says that news reporting is considered reliable if it comes from well-established outlets. The first paragraph of the early life section states that Igwe said he was born in Nigeria in a Catholic and very “highly superstitious community.” 

The Gold Coast Bulletin is an unknown source to me, since it is published in Australia. As an investigator, I clicked on the Gold Coast Wikipedia page itself and it says in 2011 the paper was charged of falsely accusing a boy of child sex crimes, the same year it reported on Igwe’s life. Due to that highlight, it makes me question the reliability of the paper and thus the reliability on the early life of Igwe. However, just because I have not heard of the source does not make it unreliable. Another portion of the article, which cites that Igwe suffered a beating for criticizing a Pastor is attributed to a web source The Guardian which I had not heard of either. However, the link is provided to the exact story where I browsed the article itself and the website to check its legitimacy. The news service seems reliable to me. The difference is that the source was complete in the reference list allowing me to make this check whereas it was not fully complete for the Gold Coast article. The source itself does not link you to the paper where it cites that fact, merely to the Wikipedia page. Of the 29 sources, Igwe is prominent in more than a handful of them. Not only in using his research, but they also use the International Humanist and Ethical Union which he is part of, interviews of Igwe, and his manifestos. The least credible source I noticed in the resources is a YouTube video, since it can be a self-published work which Wikipedia says are questionable sources. The video is one of the least credible sources, but is balanced with other sources of particular “witch hunter” in Nigeria who committed heinous crimes that are cited from BBC documentaries and an HBO special. These other broadcast sources are highly credible compared to the YouTube video. Overall I believe this article is fairly reliable because of the mostly scholarship based citations they provide. The only concern a Wikipedia user might have is that most of this scholarship research comes from Igwe himself. However, this is balanced with interviews and other news reporting cites that seem to be mostly reliable and factual.