User:Tim Mckee/Wikipedia Philosophy

Tim McKee

Userboxes

Wikipedia Philosophy

Christianity

Music

Sandbox

Article Incubator

Discussion

I, Tim McKee, have lots of views on the wonderful website Wikipedia. This is my Wikipedia Philosophy. First of all, let me say that I love Wikipedia. No other online encyclopedia or database rivals Wikipedia in my opinion—to have the great abundance of information from a (mostly) neutral and worldwide perspective is truly wonderful. Nonetheless, improvements to Wikipedia can be made, and are made everyday. Below I will highlight changes I think should be made in Wikipedia policy, or general directions Wikipedia should go.

Verifiability

Verifiability is one of the most important Wikipedia policies, mainly because I like to think of Wikipedia as a credible source of information. It frustrates me when teacher prohibit the citation of Wikipedia in research projects. Wikipedia should be seen as a source as reliable as Encyclopaedia Britannica, Grolier, etc. I'd like to see Wikipedia, and the other Wikimedia projects become a professional source of information. If it does so, surely it will be superior to any other encyclopedia ever made; its wealth of knowledge will be unsurpassed and its legacy will live on. Not only will the vast information on Wikipedia be accessible to all people, but that information will be accurate and confirmed by independent sources.

Now, let me be clear: I know Wikipedia has policy on verifiability (here, if you're interested). Wikipedia Policy is (at least somewhat) tough on unreferenced sources, but I believe, to become the ideal encyclopedia described above, Wikipedia Policy has to get tougher. Changes that could ensure this include:

• Information given to new users about citation and sourcing that includes a list of recommended and reliable sources that can be used for Wikipedia articles.
• The requirement that content page in Wikipedia has at least one source.
• The automatic inclusion of a "References" on every article (I'm not sure if this is feasible, though, just a thought).
• The restriction of editing from non-users. This hopefully ensures that editors are knowledgeable about Wikipedia (on that line of thought, maybe you should have to take a test on Wikipedia policy) and more likely to cite the sources. Also editors who don't reference properly can be blocked more easily if they must have an account.
• The complete blocking of high-importance articles to control editing.

Any comments/questions/devil-advocate-playing/discussion about any of the above, feel free to visit my talk page; I'd love to talk!