If you have visited Wikipedia lately, you probably have seen the appeal from Jimmy Wales to donate money. Wikipedia is the fifth largest Internet site in the world, and the only top site operating as a nonprofit. Which means they need to raise money.
Until now, I have ignored Jimmy’s pleas, taking for granted my frequent access to Wikipedia. But this Thanksgiving weekend, as I was cleaning out my home office and attempting to cull my book collection to make some room on the shelves, I realized something that convinced me to make a donation.
If you have ever tried to get rid of some of your old books, you know how hard it can be to pull the trigger.
Some books, like my copy of The Great Gatsby, one of the great novels of the 20th century, are clearly keepers even though it cost just $1.00 at the used book store back when it had an intact cover.
Others books are wrenching decisions. How can I possibly toss out the TED Book Club selection from 2009? I still haven’t read it!
Some books, on the other hand, are easy decisions, headed for the recycle bin because even the library won’t take them. I found a whole shelf of books that I haven’t touched in years. Technology books, software books, reference books.
Information storage, not stories.
I realized that one of the biggest reasons I haven’t touched these reference books in a while, and certainly haven’t bought a new one in years, is Wikipedia.
The information in Wikipedia is fresher, well-written for the most part, and far more extensive than the best reference library. So why buy books that are just information stores when Wikipedia has so much more to offer?
The footnotes on Wikipedia are one of the best parts of the service. With every article on Wikipedia you are one click away from the best bibliography on the web for any topic.
Crazy as it sounds, my kids tell me that their teachers don’t allow them to cite Wikipedia in their research papers, even though it is the first place the go for any new project. Even so, Wikipedia is an invaluable research tool for students because they can go to the footnotes and find original sources that no one argues with.
To my surprise, my kids also had contributed to Wikipedia. What might a grade school kid add to the greatest encyclopedia on the planet? Adding information about the latest MMORPG? In fact, they had corrected and added to some of the topics being taught in their classroom.
I learned first hand the rigor of the Wikipedia contribution process.
A curator aptly named the “Red Pen of Doom” had reversed most of my own additions, self-serving edits aimed at revising and correcting the history of one of my early educational video games. Why the rejection? Insufficient references.
Wikipedia’s gift to education is far more than its reference value. It is the notion of radical participation.
Kids today grow up knowing that they can be active participants in the generation and curation of knowledge. The idea that knowledge is collaborative is quite different than my experience growing up with the old Encyclopedia Brittanica. The old encyclopedias engendered the feeling that knowledge only could be generated by inaccessible experts, and never was subject to question.
The reason I’m giving $100 to Wikipedia this Thanksgiving weekend is not just because I’m thankful to Jimmy Wales in persevering with this project, which has been such a gift to the human race.
It’s also economic.
When I look at my old stale reference books that not even the public library will take off my hands, I realized that I have saved hundreds of dollars over the past few years by no longer buying quickly dated references.
Just knowing that Wikipedia exists, that everything is there, including all the references, I save money — and trees.
Wikipedia has got to be the greatest bargain of the decade. So this Thanksgiving I thought I would give a little of that back.
Keep it up, Jimmy Wales. The world needs Wikipedia to thrive!