User:Ctrl build/Reviewed Primary Source Project

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Background

Wikipedia can be defined, similar to other encyclopedias as a reference material which draws its information almost exclusively from secondary and tertiary sources. Wikipedia has been criticized for the nature of its writers and the nature of the source material it draws on. (See additional external criticisms, internal criticisms, and the recent discussion on provenance for greater detail.)

[edit] Proposal

Wikipedia has the ability to be edited by anyone, anonymously or otherwise. A variation of Linus's law applied to Wikipedia is "Given enough eyeballs, all errors are shallow" [1]. Interestingly enough, the invidual who created this statement, Eric S. Raymond edits on Wikipedia as User:Eric S. Raymond, who has contibuted, to among other things, the editing of the article about himself. Thus, the article Eric S. Raymond contains primary source material about Mr. Raymond, yet has still been publicly reviewed. The article on secondary sources succintly states "A primary source is not, by default, more authoritative or accurate than a secondary source. Secondary sources often are subjected to peer review, are well documented, and are often produced through institutions where methodological accuracy is important to the future of the author's career and reputation. A primary source like a journal entry, at best, only reflects one person's take on events, which may or may not be truthful, accurate, or complete. Historians subject both primary and secondary sources to a high level of scrutiny." Wikipedia can uniquely contain reviewed primary source material. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, the primary source has just as much a voice as any other editor of the article, but the primary source can produce information and documentation beyond that which be known by other individuals. Once this information is publically introduced, like Linus' Law, "Given enough eyeballs, and a primary source, any piece of information becomes pertinent and valid." If primary sources are encouraged to actively contribute and comment upon the information presented about them in Wikipedia, the pertience of Wikipedia beyond what can be considered just a good reference increases.