User:Gettingtoit/Additional notes

I don't know which global newspaper - Guardian or LA Times loves us more. Both have reliably used us as a resource.

"These, it is pointed out, are heavy metal umlauts, as explained in that valuable institution Wikipedia." &mdash; "Smallweed", The Guardian (London) May 14

"The facts

http:/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friday-13" "&mdash; "Life: Online: Six of the best Friday the 13th" The Guardian (London) May 12

This week four other fair sized American/Canadian newspapers used us as a source Austin American-Statesman and San Antonio Express-News twice, Tampa Tribune, and Calgary Herald (interestingly, Britannica.com was cited alongside wikipedia.org).

Deutsche Presse-Agentur (May 15), the German national news agency used us as a site of reference to another: "Since "decodeunicode.org" is an open science project, users themselves can contribute to it following the Wikipedia principle."

The Hill, weekly covering the activities of Capitol Hill used us to settle the definition of eminent domain (expanding out of our role as a tech reference) "One online encyclopedia, wikipedia.org, defines the term: "Governments most commonly use the power of eminent domain when the acquisition of real property is necessary for the completion of a public project such as a road, and the owner of the required property is unwilling to negotiate a price for its sale.' The Fifth Amendment requires that "just compensation' be paid and that "public use' of the property be demonstrated."

London Times (higher education supplement) fair sized 800 word article devoted to wikipedia. It's quite good for an introductory piece - everyone's opinion is included McHenry, the "Khmer Rouge in diapers guy'', Sanger, and Wales. The article does not make a conclusion about the reliability or superiority of the Wiki approach.  Some praise" "The Wikipedia model does have one major strength: the freedom of its coverage. There is something liberating about browsing its entries compared with those of its more orthodox competitors. The ease with which content can be created also means it is often far ahead in covering recent events.

The challenge for Wikipedia will be to retain that speed and lightness of touch while ensuring authority and reliability."

In response to last week's Slate magazine commentary on Wikipedia - some info we can be proud of:

"The big problem with Wikipedia is that no matter how many times I tell my students (undergrads at a major midwestern university) what a reliable source for an academic article is and is not, they still insist on using Wikipedia. While it may be an interesting source of information, it's not rigorous enough to be a source for a scholarly essay. Presenting itself as any sort of an encyclopedia makes it tempting for students who are too lazy to go to the library and actually DO research. Also an interesting fact: I'd say 7 out of 10 times that I catch someone plagiarizing in my classes, their lifted information comes from Wikipedia

"MidwestEmily, here, maintaining that cyber-outlet, Wikipedia, is not quite ready for prime time academia.

The kids love us!

To round out all the other press source mentions this week: centuries. The News Tribune (Tacoma, Washington), May 13, 2005 The Santa Fe New Mexican (New Mexico), May 13, 2005 Albuquerque Journal (New Mexico), May 11, 2005 SF Weekly (California), May 11, 2005