Editing Incubator escapee wiki:Press coverage 2005 (section)

==January==
*Klemm, Aaron E. "Motivation and value of free resources:  Wikipedia and PlanetMath show the way". ''Free Software Magazine''.  January 1, 2005<small>[http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/free_issues/issue_01/wiki_value/]</small>
::"Wikipedia is blurring the lines of production with astounding success."
*Krowne, Aaron.  "The FUD-based Encyclopedia: Dismantling fear, uncertainty, and doubt, aimed at Wikipedia and other free knowledge resources."  ''Free Software Magazine''.  January 3, 2005. <small>[http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/free_issues/issue_02/fud_based_encyclopedia/]</small>
::"I have never used an encyclopedia as much as Wikipedia and I thank the Wikipedia community for what they have created. Countless others share these sentiments. Wikipedia has enhanced my life and brought considerable progress to society."
*Rupley, Sebastian. "Wikis at Work." ''PC Magazine''. January 3, 2005. <small>[http://www.pcmag.com/print_article2/0,2533,a=141231,00.asp]</small>
::"One of the more robust wikis is at www.wikipedia.com, which bills itself as "the free encyclopedia." It is a multilingual, open-content encyclopedia that anyone can edit."
*Till, Francis. "Tsunami blogging: The curl in the wave, first hand." ''National Business Review''. January 4, 2005. <small>[http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1747640,00.asp]</small>
::"You can get a really good consensus picture of what's going on that's stronger than any one news organization could offer," Jimmy Wales, founder of the online encyclopedia Wikipedia, told ''Silicon Valley''. "So many people are on the ground in different places. And people pick up very quickly which are the bloggers to read, and they bring that information to the forefront and amplify it."
*Tanner, Alex. "Design fair restructures in light of disaster." ''Netimperative'' (UK). <small>[http://www.netimperative.com/2005/01/4/Design_fair2/view]</small>
::"Alex Steffen from worldchanging.com and Jimmy Wales of wikipedia have been drafted into the programme [the Doors of Perception design symposium] to assist."
*Gapper, John. "A new entrant to the knowledge market." ''Financial Times''. January 5, 2005. <small>[http://news.ft.com/cms/s/67bc195c-5f54-11d9-8cca-00000e2511c8.html]</small> (available free).
::"The only instant reference work is Wikipedia, a free online encyclopedia written by anybody who wants to contribute. If you look now (www.wikipedia.org), there is a first draft of history, with a simulation of how the tidal wave spread across the ocean, a table of estimated deaths in different countries and links to entries on related subjects." (entire article about Wikipedia)
*Johnson, Bobbie. "Emergency services." ''The Guardian''. January 6, 2005. <small>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/story/0,3605,1383611,00.html]</small>
::"Within a few hours of the quake, users were logging on to communal online encyclopedia Wikipedia and compiling a breakdown of what had occurred, including scientific analysis, links to news articles and ways to give aid."
*Author unknown. "Love at first site as Wikipedia keeps growing." ''Jewish Chronicle''. January 7, 2005.
::"Wikipedia recently celebrated its one millionth entry which, I am delighted to reveal, was a Hebrew article on the Kazakhstan flag - well, someone's going to be interested".
::A quote from The Guardian on vandalism and reversions follows.

*Mustard, Laurie. "Strollin' through Wikipedia . . ." ''Winnipeg Sun''. January 8, 2005. <small>[http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Winnipeg/Laurie_Mustard/2005/01/08/833438.html]</small>
::"I have found the most fascinating website titled Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, and you're going to love it." (entire column about Wikipedia)

*Naughton, John. "Why encyclopaedic row speaks volumes about the old guard." ''The Observer''. January 9, 2005. <small>[http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,1386027,00.html]</small>
::Writing about the current debate about Wikipedia Naughton opines: "five years from now, when the Wikipedia is essential infrastructure, we'll hardly remember what the fuss was about."

*Terdiman, Daniel. "Wikipedia Faces Growing Pains" ''Wired News''. January 10, 2005. <small>[http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,66210,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_2]</small>
::On the tension between academic credibility and collaboration, and concludes with, "The question, then, is what people should expect of Wikipedia. As it grows and becomes a repository of 2 million entries from more and more contributors, more of whom are experts in their fields, it probably will be seen as on par with the Britannicas of the world. But first it must convince those experts to become involved, and that will likely mean finding a way to make them feel welcome.."

*Corkery, Paul. "Wikipedia reinvents information searching." ''The Triangle''. January 14, 2005.<small>[http://www.thetriangle.org/news/2005/01/14/SciTech/Wikipedia.Reinvents.Information.Searching-833083.shtml]</small>
::Regardless of its risk of inaccuracy, Wikipedia exists as a noteworthy experiment relating to the idea of Internet users to come together in the spirit of knowledge and learning. What had the potential to become a public toilet of misinformation exists instead as one of the most successful examples of a human oriented, self policing collaborative education effort.

::I cannot, because of the reasons pointed out by various resources, plug Wikipedia as the be-all-end-all research tool. However, Wikipedia itself represents a noteworthy use of the Internet and its growing pool of users. Coordinated development projects, as well as national and international Internet based communities and the technologies used in their operation, offer a fascinating look into the lesser known value of how the world's premier communication tool deals with information.

::Wikipedia, despite its potential flaws, builds upon the noble foundation upon which the Internet was formed - A digital world in which the free exchange of information and knowledge brings the world together through the sharing of ideas and concepts.

* Burt, Steve. "A Wiki-margin for the Internet". ''eSchool News''. January 12, 2005. <small>[http://www.eschoolnews.com/eti/2005/01/000434.php]</small>
::Well ... perhaps wikis won&#8217;t quite take off this year to the degree that weblogs did in 2004, but there is not doubt in my mind that you will be hearing much more about wikis in the months to come. If you are not familiar with wikis, they are open-editable web pages. That is, pages which you can edit the content by simply clicking on one button (usually an &#8216;edit&#8217; tab) from within your browser. Take a look at Wikipedia to find out a bit more.
::If you want to begin experimenting with Wikis right away and you have Firefox installed on your machine, then I&#8217;d urge you to visit Wikalong.org and download the wikalong extension. This extension embeds a wiki in the sidebar of your browser, indexed off the url of the current page you are visiting. That is, wikalong builds a &#8216;parallel&#8217; wiki for any page you visit. Thus, you can comment, discuss and wax philosophical about any issue on a page you are visiting. 
::In terms of how you and your students could use wikalong, on the simplest level it can be used as a running commentary or parallel blog to whatever page you are looking at. Of course, you can embed links to point to other interesting pages. Simple note-taking or really anything else that you might use a blog, wiki or discussion board for. In addition to the panoply of possible uses, the other strength of wikalong is that you-as-the-user don&#8217;t have to install anything on a server or rely on any IT support beyond having Firefox and knowing how to surf the Web.
::Tim Lauer originally pointed me towards this tool so as you get it installed you&#8217;ll see a bit of commentary between he and I on some of these pages. You&#8217;ll notice that Wikalong has a log-in feature which allows posters to connect with each other.

* ''Atticus''. ''[[The Sunday Times (UK)|The Sunday Times]]'' (London). January 16, 2005. <small>[http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-1442838_2,00.html]</small>
*:"It must be where [[Tony Blair]] learned all about spin and inflation. The prime minister&#8217;s biography in Wikipedia, the internet encyclopaedia that its users write, claims that between the ages of 13 and 15 'he worked during school holidays as a bicycle repairer in the local hardware store'. A prankster&#8217;s work, sadly."

* Hsueh, Hungfu. "Taiwan Encyclopedia opens site to users". ''Taiwan News''. January 19, 2005. <small>[http://www.etaiwannews.com/Arts_and_Culture/2005/01/19/1106100387.htm]</small>
*:"Chiang Shao-ting, Senior Adviser of the encyclopedia project, highlighted the fact that the Taiwan Encyclopedia will allowing users to edit or add new key words. 'Like the free online encyclopedia Wikipedia which is highly popular among users, the Taiwan Encyclopedia will also be a open platform that allows user to contribute to its content.'"

* [[Adam L. Penenberg|Penenberg, Adam L.]]. "Like it or not, Blogs Have legs". ''Wired News''. January 20, 2005. <small>[http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,66336,00.html?tw=wn_2culthead]</small>
*:In the world of words, the closest analogy would be Wikipedia, the web citizen's encyclopedia that is compiled exclusively by volunteers. The problem is, since anyone can write anything about anybody or anything without any oversight, the quality is often uneven. For example, I plugged [[Adam Penenberg|myself]] (a subject I am somewhat familiar with) into its search engine and found a glaring error and a typo in the short, 95-word passage. Like consensus, Wikipedia is wonderful for getting people active in the process, but perhaps not as good for editorial accuracy. (Then again, have you seen The New York Times' correction box?)

* Taylor, Dave. "What's Acceptable Search Engine "Spam" Technique?". ''[[InformIT]]''. January 21, 2005. <small>[http://www.informit.com/articles/article.asp?p=363737]</small>
*:"For example, Wikis are singled out as a bad technology, yet a Wiki is just a minimalist shared white board, a technology that lets a group of people share the maintenance of Web-based content. The most popular is probably Wikipedia, which is a fabulous resource, but even Net-savvy publisher O'Reilly has a Wiki that they use to manage the interaction between the company, their authors, and user groups. 
*:"The argument of the article author, though, is that Wikis are dangerous because anyone can -- theoretically -- add content and therefore add bogus links back to a third-party site. Are Wikis therefore bad because people can "spam" them? Of course not. 
*:"Just like comments on a weblog or entries in a guestbook, pages on a Wiki should be monitored to ensure that the information thereon is relevant."

* Unsigned article. "Written by whoever wants to". ''Revista VEJA''. January 23, 2005. 
*: VEJA magazine, a brazilian weekly publication, published an article on Wikipedia stating its contents aren't reliable since anyone online can edit them. To prove their point, VEJA spread misinformation on wikipedia about brazilian president Lula, which is stated in their January 23 article. "Deliberate misinformation on Lula's article spread by VEJA stayed untouched for 48 hours"

*Société de transport de Montréal. "Les meilleurs sites Internet: Le métro de Montréal sur le web." Info STM. ''Métro'' (Montreal), 26 January 2005, p. 21. <small>[http://www.stm.info/info/infostm/2005/050126.pdf] (.pdf format)</small>
::"Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia on the Web, containing hundreds of thousands of articles in more than fifty languages. Unlike other encyclopedias, the text is written by the users themselves. In the case of the [[Montreal metro]], there can be no doubt about the quality of its information, as the page was written with the collaboration of none other than <nowiki>[</nowiki>[[user:Montréalais|Montréalais]]<nowiki>]</nowiki>!"
::''note:'' This is an information page prepared by the STM, printed in the ''[[Metro International|Métro]]'' free newspaper as a condition of its distribution in metro stations. The article, on websites about the metro, had previously referred to [http://www.metrodemontreal.com/ my website on the metro]. -- [[User:Montrealais|Montr&eacute;alais]] 19:21, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

* Rubel, Steve. "Wikis Pose A Threat To Costly Media Directories." ''WebProNews''. January 27, 2005. <small>[http://www.webpronews.com/news/ebusinessnews/wpn-45-20050127WikisPoseaThreattoCostlyMediaDirectories.html]</small> 
::"In the future, PR professionals - and even consumers - will create their own media directories. For a glimpse of this today, check out [[:Category:Journalists|this page]] on Wikipedia. They are starting to index journalists, including [[Jennifer 8. Lee]] of the New York Times. The paid services better evolve fast. Because in the near future as wikis become more popular and easier to set up, we may end up forming our own tool that enables us to share our knowledge. "

* Mossberg, Walter S. "Unlike Search Engines, Answers.Com Responds With Data, Not Links". ''Wall Street Journal''. January 27, 2005. <small>[http://ptech.wsj.com/ptech.html]</small>
::"There are some downsides to Answers.com. It has answers for only about a million available topics so far. And it relies heavily on Wikipedia, which has been criticized because it isn't written or edited by experts. But unlike some recognized sources like the online Encyclopedia Britannica, Answers.com is free and instantly searches multiple reference works from multiple publishers."

* "Wikipedia Battle over Controversial Web Site Entry Ended". ''ChatMag''. January 29, 2005. <small>[http://www.chatmag.com/news/012905_wiki_battle.html]</small>
::Details a controversy at [[Perverted-Justice.com]].

*Cone, Edward. "Making inside of newsroom as big as outside". ''Greensboro News & Record''. January 30, 2005. <small>[http://www.news-record.com/news/columnists/staff/h3cone_013005.htm]</small>
::"Then there was Jimmy Wales, founder of the Wikipedia, a collaborative online encyclopedia written and edited on the Web by thousands of people around the world (wikis are software that allow groups to work together online). The free encyclopedia is trustworthy, huge, multilingual and growing, and is produced for only a fraction of what gets spent by traditional competitors."

*Hunt, Kurt. "Four hours to a smarter you". ''Eastern Echo'' (Eastern Michigan University). January 31, 2005. <small>[http://www.easternecho.com/cgi-bin/story.cgi?4496]</small>
::"Truly informed people know more than what CNN feeds them&#8212;they take the time to look into the background of topics, to learn about how things come about, and how they interrelate. Which is why you are now heading to wikipedia.org, an Internet-compiled, completely free, community-written encyclopedia."

*Hall, Mark. "Open-Source Gnaws Its Way Into..." ''Computerworld''. January 31, 2005. <small>[http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/software/appdev/story/0,10801,99349,00.html]</small>
::"In addition, Clusty includes thumbnail images from www.wikipedia.com with selected results, which breaks up pages and makes them easier to read."