User:137.142.173.14/sandbox

DISCUSSION
What do you think of Wikipedia's definition of "neutrality"?

Wikipedia's definition of neutrality is very similar to mine. It's crucial to have a neutral viewpoint when adding content to a site like Wikipedia. Bias viewpoints can corrupt the viewers learning process and cause them to also have a bias view on the topic being researched. Its important to let the viewer make their own opinions based on the facts given to them.

What are the impacts and limits of Wikipedia as a source of information?

Wikipedia offers a great launchpad point when looking into a topic. It has a great deal of reliable sources cited at the bottom of each page. Which allows members to get the best info on the topic they are researching. A limit is that Wikipedia is not a one stop shop, it should not be used as a primary source.

'''On Wikipedia, all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. What kinds of sources does this exclude? Can you think of any problems that might create?'''

This excludes all self published media or certain news outlets, for example blogs and Fox News. Both of these sources consist of biased info that do not fit Wikipedia's definition of neutrality and therefore do not offer the best learning experience that wiki-users should get.

'''If Wikipedia were written 100 years ago, how might its content (and contributors) be different? What about 100 years from now?'''

100 years ago Wikipedia would definitely not be as reliable as it is today. I feel like there wouldn't be enough users to make it safe from false info. I also believe people wouldn't be able to find enough reliable sources to make it as detailed as it is today.

100 years from now Wikipedia I feel can become a primary source. Wikipedia is constantly evolving and coming up with new protocols to better the website. In the future I think Wikipedia will develop new ways to immediately delete false content and keep wiki trollers off the site completely. While also maybe hiring people to make updates on the info within sites, for example maybe scientists directly or reliable individuals.