Wikipedia Knowledge Gap
editPeople come to Wikipedia to write and edit articles about various notable topics. People can contribute from many countries and can produce information that may not be known to other parts of the world. I’m sure you’ve heard of Wikipedia being “unreliable” because of the fact that anyone can edit. What those people don’t realize is part of what makes Wikipedia great is because anyone can edit. Having contributions from multiple editors on one article instantly boosts its credibility. The reason why it is encouraged to contribute is because you become another set of eyes to watch out for mistakes, vandalism, or simply just missing content that could be added. Wikipedia wants to have a wide range of editors and a wide range of content. Fortunately, college students like me we want to produce uncovered content, but we can’t do it alone.
What has been a large concern in the world of Wikipedia is the infamous knowledge gap. According to the Encyclopedia of Applied Ethics, “the knowledge gap refers to a disparity in access to information and tools by the poor and in accessing, recognizing, and promoting the creativity of the developing world” (Chadariu 497-503). In other words, there is minimal information being shared by certain groups of people. A knowledge gap can be a breech in knowledge about or from a specific country. It could be that less coverage is being done by a specific economic class. It could even be that there are less editors and articles about a certain gender. For Wikipedia, this has been an ongoing issue that is searching for possible solutions.
To start, it is to no surprise to know where most of the editors of Wikipedia are from. In 2018 reports showed that“Europe and North America contribute 35.2% and 23.6% of Wikipedia’s edits respectively” (Oxford Internet Institute). This can be explained by a few things. For instance, Europe and North America are a few of the most developed countries in the world. Having computers and access to internet is something that comes easy, so of course more people will write up Wikipedia articles. For those who have less accessibility are also going to have less technological skills to be able to collaborate on a cite like this. Another valid reason could be that everything gets media coverage in the U.S. We are so quick to spread new information, that we always have plenty of sources to explore for that. This means that when creating an article on Wikipedia, we have so many references that help conjure up a meaningful article. In an interview by Vice Magazine, Graham also stated, “you need content to make more content on Wikipedia; You can't just submit content without any citation”. This is true. The happenings in Europe and North America create more than enough content for what is needed in a Wikipedia article.
Along with the global disparity, there is also a gender disparity among the editors. A large majority of what is written on Wikipedia is created by men. The 2008 Wikimedia Foundation and United Nations MERIT Program surveyed over 50,000 Wikipedia contributors and found that only 13% of those were women. This being said, the articles are going to reflect this disparity. Males are going to want to write articles on topics males tend to be most passionate about. According to a 2011 New York Times report, “articles on ‘female topics’ are fewer, shorter, and less well maintained” (Cohen). For Wikipedia, this is a huge threat to its reliability. It’s not always reliable to have men discuss topics related to women. For example, “Amanda Filipacchi revealed in The New York Times in 2013 that women are being moved from ‘American Novelists’ category to a sub-category of ‘American Women Novelists’” (Edwards 410). Women shouldn’t have to be separately categorized because it should be assumed that a woman is still an American novelist. This is just one reason Wikipedia needs better diversity because topics that aren’t familiar to a certain group may be misrepresented and aren’t always just.
References
edithttps://www.jstor.org/stable/44652520
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780123739322000661?via%3Dihub
https://geonet.oii.ox.ac.uk/blog/the-geography-of-wikipedia-edits/
https://www.vice.com/en/article/d73n3z/wikipedia-content-is-mostly-generated-from-economic-hubs