Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia in which anyone can create an account to edit or create other articles. How it works is, people add in information they think would be appropriate and helpful to an article, providing sources of where they got their information. If their information is unreliable, poorly written, contains other flaws, etc., people on Wikipedia will edit the information. The type of writing on Wikipedia is a process, just how Anne Lamott describes it in her essay, “Shitty First Draft.” It uses a network of knowledge from individuals across the globe, and it is constantly being edited for improvement. More than likely, the first drafts of Wikipedia articles were very poorly written and unorganized, but the more work that goes into them, the better they become.
When I began working on my Wikipedia edit about pre-lingual deafness, I remember feeling overwhelmed. One, because I was still getting used to using the program, and two, because I had no idea how I was going to get all the information together and organized in a clear fashion, while intertwining it with the work that was already present in the article. However, I remembered what I had read in Lamott’s essay, “Shitty First Drafts,” about not getting discouraged in the beginning of the writing process because it always tends to be the most overwhelming part. After you get over the hump, the writing process gets a lot easier. As she claims in her essay, “Almost all good writing begins with terrible efforts” (Lamott). I knew I needed to take it step by step, and in the end, my work paid off. My finished article, although not perfect, was a major improvement to what it was before. The next time someone takes time to edit the article, it will be even more insightful to those looking to gain knowledge on the subject.
Porter’s text, “Individuality and the Discourse Community,” exemplifies the fact that all text is inter-text, meaning it comes from pieces of work from other authors. Many students confuse this idea of borrowing work from others, and tying it together to form new text, with the idea of plagiarism. As students, we must get past that point of view and realize that all text is inter-text, our knowledge and ideas come from many different places, and we have the ability to combine that knowledge and put it down on paper as a new piece of work. Writing should not be thought of as “individual, isolated, and heroic” (Porter). Written work that becomes published is rarely (if ever) solely the work of one person. It goes through a series of rigorous editing before the final product is released. Wikipedia is somewhat similar to this, except it is constantly being improved, and is never actually “finished.” It is not “isolated, individual, or heroic” (Porter) as each article is the work of many individuals combined together in order to make it as complete and correct as possible.
I found Donald Murray’s article, “All Writing is Autobiography,” to be related, in a sense, to my Wikipedia edit. He claims that all writing is autobiographical because even if it doesn't come from your own experiences, per say, it still comes from somewhere in your head. The information you add to Wikipedia is expected to come from reliable sources, unless of course it is considered general knowledge. I agree with these expectations, because if you don’t have a source to back up your information, who’s to say you didn’t make up that information? On the other hand, I have a lot of background knowledge on the article I was editing (pre-lingual deafness) because I am a Communication Sciences and Disorders major. I noticed that while I was typing up my information for article, that some of it came from the knowledge in my brain, things I remembered my professor saying in class, from my notes, from reading my textbooks, etc. I don’t remember where or in what book or class the knowledge came from, but I still have that knowledge. Therefore, should I not add in that information because I don’t have a source? Or should I add it in anyway because I know it is correct and quality information for the article? As Murray states in his article, "I don't know where what I know comes from. Was it dreamt, read, overheard, imagined, experienced in life or at the writing desk? I have spun a web more coherent than experience."
Although I struggled with the assignment at first, when I saw my completed Wikipedia article finished online, I felt a great sense of accomplishment. I think that having Wikipedia open for everyone to use can be detrimental, but is mostly beneficial. If people want to, they can easily edit bull shit information into an article. Just know that when you are using it, to use it with caution. Everyone has knowledge to share, and if we all work together in combining, sharing, and borrowing that knowledge, we will all benefit.
No comments:
Post a Comment