| OPEN ACCESS Freely available online | PLoS COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY |
Editorial
| |
Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia
Darren W. Logan1, Massimo Sandal2, Paul P. Gardner1, Magnus Manske1, Alex Bateman1*
1 Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2 Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
Wikipedia is the world's most successful online encyclopedia, now containing over 3.3 million English language articles. It is probably hte largest collection of knowledge ever assembled, and is certainly the most widely accessible. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone with Internet access that chooses to, but does it provide reliable information? A 2005 study by Nature found that a selection of Wikipedia articles on scientific subjects were comparable to a professionally edited encyclopedia [1], suggesting a community of volunteers can generate and sustain surprisingly accurate content.
For better or worse, people are guided to Wikipedia when searching the Web for biomedical information [2]. So there is an increasing need for the scientific community to engage with Wikipedia to ensure that the information it contains is accurate and current. For scientists, contributing to Wikipedia is an excellent way of fulfilling public engagement responsibilities and sharing expertise. For example, some Wikipedian scientists have successfully integrated biological data with Wikipedia to promote community annotation [3][4]. This, in turn, encourages wider access to the linked data via Wikipedia. Others have used the wiki model to develop their own specialist, collaborative databases [5][6][7][8]. Taking your first steps into Wikipedia can be daunting, but here we provide some tips that should make the editing process go smoothly.
Rule 1: Register an Account
Although any visitor can edit Wikipedia, creating a user account offers a number of benefits. Firstly, it offers you privacy and security. Though counterintuitive, editors registered under a pseudonymous username actually have greater anonymity than those who edit "anonymously". A few of us have chosen to associate our accounts with our real identities. Should you choose to forgo pseudonymity on Wikipedia, your entire editing history will be open to indefinite scrutiny by curious Web searchers, including future colleagues, students, or employers. Do not forget this.
As in academic circles, a good reputation helps your wiki career. By logging in you can build a record of good edits, and it is easier to communicate and collaborate with others if you have a fixed, reputable identity. Finally, registering an account provides access to enhanced editing features, including a "watchlist" for monitoring articles you have edited previously.
Rule 2: Learn the Five Pillars
There are some broad principles—known as the "five pillars"—all editors are expected to adhere to when contributing to Wikipedia. Perhaps most important for scientists is the appreciation that Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought or research [9]. Accordingly, it is not an appropriate venue to promote your pet theory or share unpublished results. It is also not a soapbox on which to expound your personal theories or a battleground to debate controversial issues. In this respect, Wikipedia fundamentally differs from other types of new media, such as blogs, that encourage editorializing.
Contributing to Wikipedia is something to enjoy; a natural extension of your enthusiasm for science. But differences of opinion inevitably arise, particularly on pages provided for discussion on how to improve articles. Treat other editors as collaborators and maintain a respectful and civil mannger, even in disagreement [10]. If you begin to find a particular interaction stressful, simply log off and come back another time. Unlike most scientific enterprises, Wikipedia has no deadlines.
Rule 3: Be Bold, but Not Reckless
The survival and growth of any wiki requires participation. Wikipedia is unmatched in size, but its continuing success depends on the regular contributions of tens of thousands of volunteers. Therefore, Wikipedia urges all users to be bold: if you spot an error, correct it. If you can improve an article, please do so. It is important, however, to distinguish boldness from recklessness. Start off small. Begin by making minor modifications to existing articles before attempting a complete rewrite of History of science.
Many new editors feel intimidated about contributing to Wikipedia at first, fearing they may a mistake. Such reticence is understandable but unfounded. The worst that can happen is your first edits are deemed not to be an improvement and they get reverted. If this does occur, treat it as a positive learning experience and ask the reverting editor for advice.
Rule 4: Know Your Audience
Wikipedia is not primarily aimed at experts; therefore, the level of technical detail in its articles must be balanced against the ability of non-experts to understand those details. When contributing scientific content, imagine you have been tasked with writing a comprehensive scientific review for a high school audience. It can be surprisingly challenging exlaining complex ideas in an accessible, jargon-free manner. But it is worth the perseverance. You will reap the benefits when it comes to writing your next manuscript or teaching an undergraduate class.
Rule 5: Do Not Infringe Copyright
With certain conditions, almost all of Wikipedia's content is free for anyone to reuse, adapt, and distribute. Consequently,
Citation: Logan DW, Sandal M, Gardner PP, Manske M, Bateman A (2010) Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia. PLoS Comput Biol 6(9): e1000941. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000941
Published September 30, 2010
Copyright: &c; 2010 Logan et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this article. Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
* E-mail: agb@sanger.ac.uk
.svg){kind=logo} PLoS Computational Biology | www.ploscompbiol.org
|
1 | September 2010 | Volume 6 | Issue 9 | e1000941 |
- ↑ Giles J (2005) Internet encyclopaedias go head to head. Nature 438: 900–901.
- ↑ Laurent MR, Vickers TJ (2009) Seeking health information online: does Wikipedia matter? J Am Med Inform Assoc 16: 471–479.
- ↑ Daub J, Gardner PP, Tate J, Ramskold D, Manske M, et al. (2008) The RNA WikiProject: community annotation of RNA families. RNA 14: 2462–2464.
- ↑ Huss JW, 3rd, Orozco C, Goodale J, Wu C, Batalov S, et al. (2008) A gene wiki for community annotation of gene function. PLoS Biol 6: e175. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060175.
- ↑ Hoffmann R (2008) A wiki for the life sciences where authorship matters. Nat Genet 40: 1047–1051.
- ↑ Mons B, Ashburner M, Chichester C, van Mulligen E, Weeber M, et al. (2008) Calling on a million minds for community annotation in WikiProteins. Genome Biol 9: R89.
- ↑ Pico AR, Kelder T, van Iersel MP, Hanspers K, Conklin BR, et al. (2008) WikiPathways: pathway editing for the people. PLoS Biol 6: e184. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060184.
- ↑ Hodis E, Prilusky J, Martz E, Silman I, Moult J, et al. (2008) Proteopedia - a scientific ‘wiki’ bridging the rift between three-dimensional structure and function of biomacromolecules. Genome Biol 9: R121.
- ↑ Wikipedia contributors (2010) No original research. Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:><?show=to]No_original_research. Accessed 26 July 2010.
- ↑ Wikipedia contributors (2010) Civility. Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility. Accessed 26 July 2010.
