"Wikipedia does not publish original thought: all material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source." (I read that at Wikipedia.)
"Wikipedia's standards of inclusion--what's in and what's not--affect the work of journalists, who routinely read Wikipedia articles and then repeat the wikiclaims as 'background'..." I just read this here at Technology Review by Simson L. Garfinkel.
When the published source relies on Wikipedia content, the paradox arises.
If journalists continue to cite Wikipedia as a source, and Wikipedia links to those articles for reliability, then Wikipedia ultimately will use itself as a source, something its rules forbid: Catch-22.
How this hasn't happened yet, I don't know, but it should happen soon. But I do know that when it does, Wikipedia will vanish in a puff of logic. [1]
Eventually Wikipedia "verifiability" will be supported entirely by sources citing Wikipedia in one form or another, essentially citing itself as expert.
We can only hope that the resulting anti-net ("anti-Internet," think antimatter) black hole won't suck us all in. (But I guess if it's a black hole, it will.)
[1] What happens to God in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
Recent comments
44 minutes 16 sec ago
17 hours 29 minutes ago
1 day 8 hours ago
1 day 14 hours ago
2 days 8 hours ago
4 days 16 hours ago
4 days 20 hours ago
5 days 15 hours ago
1 week 16 hours ago
1 week 19 hours ago