User:Cbryanto/sandbox

Wikipedia Articles

 * "Legal status of tattooing in the United States." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 3 Sep. 2012. Web. 24 Sep. 2012.
 * "Tetris." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 4 Sep. 2012. Web. 24 Sep. 2012.
 * "Z-Boys." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 21 Sep. 2012. Web. 24 Sep.. 2012.

Encyclopedia Britannica

 * "Skateboarding." Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2012. Web. 24 Sep. 2012.
 * "Tetris." Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2012. Web. 24 Sep. 2012.

Funk & Wagnalls New World Encyclopedia

 * “Tattooing” Funk & Wagnalls New World Encyclopedia. Funk & Wagnalls New World Encyclopedia Database. World Almanac Education Group, Inc. 2012. Web. 04 Sep. 2012.

What I found
The three topics that I have chosen are a history of Tetris the video game, a history of the infamous skateboarding team the Z-Boys, and tattooing and the law. I felt that these topics would be well covered, but I found Wikipedia more suited for the task. The encyclopedia articles covered the intended area generally, but my more specific topics were better covered by Wikipedia. Furthermore, Wikipedia being conscious of its status of being a new media, it is extremely well referenced. The article on Tetris included 61 separate endnotes, and nine external links. This will greatly enhance studying the topic further. While the encyclopaedias offered special experts as contributors they offered little to explore further. In conclusion I would like to think that Wikipedia is a great place to start researching a topic. While the open editor style may cause suspicion of its validity; its extensive referencing increases its credibility.



Wikipedia Comparison
It is common knowledge that Tetris is one of the most important video games of all time. It has become so successful that there is a great amount of literature written about it. Being an electronic intellectual property (ip) much has been written about it, in an electronic format. This paper will prove that Wikipedia: the free encyclopedia is just as, or better, credible source as any other electronic encyclopedia. To prove this point: a summary comparing and contrasting of Wikipedia and the Encyclopedia Britannica articles will be made, an assessment of the referred material  citied by each article, and finally an overall assessment of both articles as a whole. Once completed, this article will justify Wikipedia as a credible source. The Wikipedia article covers a tremendous amount of material. It starts with a description of the simple gameplay of the game. The history of the game: from its creation in Russia to the creation of The Tetris Company. The article goes on to give a description of the many variants Tetris has spawned. Finally the Wikipedia article gives an explanation of Tetris’ effects on the human mind and its historical influence as a whole. The Britannica Online article defines the who, what, where of Tetris creation, gives a description of the gameplay, and finally the article briefly summarizes the controversial legal history of the ip. While at a glance, it may appear that the two articles cover the same topics, but the Wikipedia article’s superiority will soon become evident. While the Britannica Online article mentions Tetris creator, Alexey Pajitnov, as simply a Russian designer, the Wikipedia article goes on to give a hyperlink to a step by step history of his role with the company and beyond. While both do adequately describing how to play Tetris, but only the Wikipedia article describes the variants of gameplay that has evolved over history. It is also in the writing of the legal history of the game is where the Wikipedia material shines. The Britannica Online article merely mentions that there were licensing issues with the game; while the Wikipedia article gives an extremely descriptive narration of those legal battles. Finally the Britannica Online article doesn't mention neither the effects of playing Tetris on the human mind or the lasting influence Tetris has had on gaming history. The Wikipedia article is far more extensive going into more topics, in a greater detail. There is also the addition point of difference between the Wikipedia and the Britannica Online articles, in referenced materials. This is another place where Wikipedia shines. On the Wikipedia article on Tetris there are five other referring Wikipedia articles, 61 endnotes and nine external hyperlinks. The Encyclopedia Britannica has only two referring Britannica Online articles, one external link, and two named contributors. Wikipedia’s extra internal references shows that it is more versed on related topics. The Britannica Online’s article contributor of note is the staff computer scientist William L. Hosch, and The Wikipedia contributors are hidden. That may seem like a liability on Wikipedia’s part, but it is not. That is because the invisibility of the Wikipedia contributors is balanced by the extensive end noting. These end notes provide the documentation that an article unreferenced written by a staff writer does not. An example of this point of a discrepancy of documentation; is of the two sources in the area of justifying the statement that Tetris is among the most successful intellectual properties of the industry. The Encyclopedia Britannica simply states that the game is a success; while the Wikipedia article defines it a success through quoting and citing sales figures. Therefore one is an opinion while the other is a statement of fact. With 61 end notes.to none, one can see how more convincing the Wikipedia article is compared to the Britannica Online articles. In the case of researching Tetris as an historical artifact, one would see the sheer limitations of the Encyclopedia Britannica Online as a major source. It was written by one staff person, on contributor and edited by a staff of many editors. It can be argued that the Wikipedia encyclopedia has a least an equal number of editors, with a greater number of contributors / authors. The Wikipedia paradigm of writing an encyclopedia may be non-professional; nerveless their conclusions are apparent and visible. It is the sheer number of end notes (not counting the secondary sources of related hyperlinks) is its strength. Furthermore the extensive notation offers a ready-made bibliography in which search for more information. It is that which an encyclopedia is truly for, ready reference questions, and pointing someone towards more traditional sources. The fact that the Encyclopedia Britannica does not disclose its editor teams fact checking that we lose the ability to confirm the author’s assumptions, or the advantage of receiving a bibliographical list. That is why in researching a topic like Tetris Wikipedia is superior to a traditional encyclopedia. In terms of importance, few video games are as document as Tetris. This documentation has surfaced in monographs, traditional encyclopedias, and even Wikipedia. It was this paper’s position that Wikipedia is just as, and even in some ways better. suited to describing this game. This point was defined by comparing and contrasting the content of Wikipedia and the information from the encyclopedia Britannia Online. While neither source should replace a true monograph on the subject ; either is a credible source for beginning one’s research or obtaining a ready reference answer