Ok, you guys know I edit on Wikipedia. You know that while I have gripes with that particular encyclopedia, I still continue to contribute articles to it. With great power comes great responsibility. Those of you who know me know just how much "power" I actually have. As for the responsibility part, well we know that Wikipedia is an inevitable conclusion. No matter how much people say don't trust it, check other sources, etc...most people don't. So I'm doing what I can to make sure that the whenever someone *does* rely entirely on an article that I steward, they're getting quality, factual information.
Here's an example of one of my gripes with the online service. Wikipedia's greatest strength, that anyone can edit it, is also its greatest weakness. On one hand, you have people like me: knowledgeable, scientifically-minded people with an excellent grasp of the English language. On the other hand...you have the "elow poh" people who keep on adding unsourced, unencyclopedic
chismis to articles about their favorite celebrities. Now, since Wikipedia is open to anyone and everyone, anyone can just drop in and insert a particular falsehood into any article. Sure, this will eventually be found out and corrected...but what about all the people who visited that article in-between?
Yari na.
Why the short discussion about Wikipedia? Because of that little icon in the lower right. That, is the icon of WikiPilipinas. What is it? WikiPilipinas bills itself as a "
hip and free encyclopedia that anyone can edit." Uh-oh. That's essentially the pinoy style, isn't it? Take something that works, make it "hipper" and then call it "
proudly pinoy." While it isn't a straight rip-off of Wikipedia, a great deal of WikiPilipinas is redundant.
But that isn't the confused web service's only problem. Many of these problems have been appropriately addressed by Filipino blogger Seav in his blog entry entitled "
There is currently no point to WikiPilipinas".
What problems do I foresee with WikiPilipinas? Let's start with the vandalism issue I previously discussed. There should theoretically be less vandalism on WikiPilipinas compared to Wikipedia, simply because the former requires editors to register; the latter allows anonymous editing. While this is a simple deterrent to casual vandalism, I *have* seen vandalism on WikiPilipinas...I've seen it stay there for days. In fact, one of the vandalism-edits is still there. See, that's one problem with requiring editors to register...people who can fix things...can't. Now, Wikipedia relies on a LOT of vandal-hunters, recent changes-patrollers and other people who just essentially have a lot of time on their hands. As a primarily Filipino-only resource, WikiPilipinas can never claim to have the same advantage. Wikipedia has global appeal. While most American editors are asleep in their beds, Aussies, Brits and other English-speaking people on this side of the world are awake (obviously, I'm talking about the English Wikipedia). I'm willing to bet that a lot of vandalism-edits will stay in the wee hours of the morning within the GMT +8 region. And who's to say how many pinoy editors are willing to take up the mantle of the vandal-hunter? Most Filipinos can't even be bothered to pick up their own trash.
Another problem with WikiPilipinas is its thrust. The dude behind the service, Gus Vibal keeps advertising it as an "encyclopedia by Filipinos for Filipinos." That statement alone should raise eyebrows. According to the history of China by China for China...Tianenmen Square is...just a place.
I guess we shouldn't ask the Japanese about World War II either.
Hmm...anyone else thinks there may be a *little* bias in having an encyclopedia for Filipinos...by Filipinos? Many of the advocates of WikiPilipinas say that "
only Filipinos know the Philippines the best." I beg to disagree. As a biologist, most Filipinos don't even know anything about the place they call their country. Oh sure, they know who this particular actress is rumored to be linked to or where the "hippest" bar is in the Metro. I doubt the typical pinoy can tell me about
Oxyeleotris expatria or even
Bubalus mindorensis - both endemic animals that can only be found in the country. Most, if not all the sources of information on those subjects are written almost entirely by foreigners. I know this, because I wrote both those articles. I researched on them, collated information from the meager sources I could find and wrote the articles. Very few of them are actually Philippine publications. Most of the Philippine publications are from the 20s, when the Americans were in charge. :P
WikiPilipinas has several policies, obviously made so as to be the opposite of some of Wikipedia's policies. My problem is, most of these policies are some of the few policies that MAKE WIKIPEDIA WORK.
Neutral point of view is one of Wikipedia's core values. Founder Jimmy Wales has gone so far as to state that it is "non-negotiable." I tend to agree. The policy essentially states that while editors may have their biases and prejudices, but articles must be written from a neutral point of view. WikiPilipinas claims that a "neutral point of view" is impossible. I do believe they're still confused about what NPOV actually means. Instead, they expect that a "fair discussion of an issue from all sides." If they actually read WP:NPOV, they'd realize that what they just said...IS NPOV.
One cornerstone policy of Wikipedia is "
no original research." That essentially means that people are not allowed to make stuff up. Everything in an article must be backed up by facts and sources. Nothing made up. WikiPilipinas...encourages original research. Sure, they state that editors should "back up arguments by sources." "
Content can be synthesized to advance a position." Uh, I thought they weren't taking a position? Either way, this is going to be a mess and it'll be fun to watch. Best case scenario, the place turns into essayland with opinionated papers flying left-and-right. Worst case?
Behold. The Friendster-ification of WikiPilipinas.
Now, a policy of Wikipedia that I have bumped into time-and-time again is that of
notability. Essentially, article subjects must be notable - yep, that's a very subjective area right there. Who decides notability? Wikipedia solves this by consensus. Not voting, but informed discussion. WikiPilipinas throws this out the window. They state that "
WikiPilipinas is not an academic encyclopedia." (At least they're aware that they're not. Now here's to hoping they stop pretending to be one.) For the first time in a year of editing Wikipedia, I finally see concrete proof of why WP:NOTABILITY exists. I wonder how long until WikiPilipinas' servers are clogged full of "articles" on some guy's grandfather, his obscure school club and his dog.
Conflict of interest is one important Wikipedia policy that supports its neutral point of view. WP:COI, as it is endearingly referred to means you shouldn't edit articles about subjects that you are preternaturally biased towards: articles about your friends, your family, companies that you own or even an article about you. It's pretty natural - people naturally want themselves to sound good; time-and-time again I've come across these self-serving articles on Wikipedia. I usually fix most of them, tag some of them with the appropriate warning templates and I've even sent a few of them to the abyss. Many people have been warned, some sanctioned for breaking this rule. Even Jimbo Wales, the founder of Wikipedia was lambasted for editing the article about him. It's just fair. WikiPilipinas as of today, has no such guideline. Who's to stop politicians from building the most self-serving article about themselves? Companies? Barkadas? By the way, the converse is also true. I've already witnessed a lot of Pro-GMA editors make negative edits on ABS articles and vice-versa on Wikipedia. In the no-man's land that is WikiPilipinas, such incidents of sniping could turn into full-scale wars. Just like every pinoy forum out there on the web.
One thing that worries me about WikiPilipinas is that pinoys have an over-inflated sense of nationalism. I've made posts before about hyper-nationalism, but the appearance of this "encyclopedia" just really brings a lot of topics I've written about in the past back into the spotlilght. One, the "by Filipinos for Filipinos" advocates seem to take pride in the (mistaken) fact that the encyclopedia is going to be written by Filipinos (anyone from anywhere can register). Another is the "crab mentality" creche. There are a LOT of pinoys out there that are oh-so-willing to cry "crab mentality" at any criticism of their beloved project. Perhaps they should read what the critics say instead of shutting them out. One more thing that has tripped some alarms in my head is...how Philippine-centric must a topic be to be in WikiPilipinas? Sure, tamaraws and endemic lake gobies will have articles there as endemic animals. How about
Passer montanus (maya) and the various tilapia species? Will it even be mentioned that they were INTRODUCED into this country and aren't native? How about articles on the green turtle or the humpback whale? Should they have articles if they only stray within Philippine territory for a few days a year? How about animals that aren't even found here? Are we going to see articles on okapi or tuataras? I do believe that the answer to that question should be yes. And that begs the question...what's the point then? As Seav has asked, why not just consolidate effort into building Wikipedia or Citizendium articles?
I can answer that question. Because of people like
these. I believe that WikiPilipinas has a place in the world...just as Zion has a place in the machine world in The Matrix universe. Hopefully, WikiPilipinas will act as a magnet for all the showbiz/elow poh/fanboys who won't bump into the same walls they will over at Wikipedia. Taking on the example I have linked to above...we have to face the fact that many if not most Filipinos have a below-average grasp of the written English language. Hell, many of them suck at speaking English...let alone writing. As an educator, there's a reason why I spent blood and sweat reconstructing my exams from mostly-essay to multiple choice. I do NOT enjoy reading most students' essays. Considering that I encountered these students at one of the top universities in the country (arguably the one with the best English skills), it's frightening to realize that most people who will be contributing to WikiPilipinas...just don't have "it".
There you go. A bunch of comparisons between WikiPilipinas and Wikipedia. Wikipedia has a LOT of weaknesses, make no mistake. I have a lot of gripes with it and I even have a "criticism of Wikipedia" section on my
Wikipedia user page. But WikiPilipinas...has a LOOOOOOOONG way to go before it even gets to where Wikipedia is. Arguably, the same kooks and dickheads will be found on WikiPilipinas as its global counterpart. When it happens, will it survive its very own
Essjay controversy? Or worse, what happens when a
Seigenthaler event occurs? We'll have to wait and see. Personally, I'm actually still on the fence whether I should join WikiPilipinas or not. I don't even have enough time for all of my hobbies, even Wikipedia. But I do recognize that they over at WikiPilipinas NEED people like me. Not just for the academic and scientific expertise, but also for the Wikipedia experience. In my year of being a Wikipedian, I've been exposed to and have been learning all its rules, policies and guidelines, procedures and politics. Debates on whether articles are notable enough or neutral enough not to be deleted, doing detective work to find out whether one person is using two accounts, communicating with other editors whose views I don't agree with, mentoring a former student (Hey Aria! *waves*) into a mature Wikipedian my equal - been there, done that. I have experience in community encyclopedia-building. And right now, that's experience that WikiPilipinas won't have...for now.
Interestingly, somebody already started an
article about WikiPilipinas on Wikipedia. Its
first incarnation was a mere copy-and-paste from WikiPilipinas' "about" page. It's now fixed, dealing with the web site from an unbiased, neutral point of view. The article is well-sourced now, arguably well-written, concise and yet informational. I should know. I'm the one who fixed it that way.
I guess that's the beauty of Wikipedia. It has a healthy amount of people like me.
Addendum (August 30, 2007):
I am very, very pissed off. I just discovered that aside from text *I* wrote, various images that *I* uploaded to Wikipedia were shamelessly copied by WikiPilipinas. Illegally, mind you. The GFDL license that I released them under *requires* that they attribute ANYTHING they copy under the GFDL. That means they have to LINK to the original sources they COPIED their information from and explicitly state that they have done so. On the images I released under the GFDL, NONE were attributed to me. This is an article worthy of the series "LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT THE FILIPINO." Indeed.
