|
د ويکيپېډيا ليکنې د امريکا په متحده ايالاتو کې د فلورېډا د قانون او ګڼ شمېر لارښوونو او کړنلارو د څارنې نه برخمنې دي;<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index.php/id;1866322157;fp;2;fpid;2 |title=Who's behind Wikipedia? |publisher=PC World |date=2008-02-06 |accessdate=2008-02-07}}</ref> د دغو کړنلارو نه ښکاره ده چې د ويکيپېډيا ليکنې بايد د "پام وړ" <ref>{{cite web |url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability |title=Wikipedia:Notability |accessdate=2008-02-13 |quote=A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.}}</ref> سرليکونو نه برخمنې وي او په دغو کې بايد "د اصلي څېړنو کوم متن"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research |title=Wikipedia:No original research |accessdate=2008-02-13 |quote=Wikipedia does not publish original thought}}</ref> شامل نه وي همداراز په دغو ليکنو کې بايد يوازې "په ثبوت رسېدلي"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability |title= Wikipedia:Verifiability |accessdate=2008-02-13 |quote=Material challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, must be attributed to a reliable, published source.}}</ref> حقايق وي او پکار ده چې هره ليکنه د بې پرې سياست او د يوه "ناپېيلي نظر څرګندونه وکړي."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view |title= Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view |accessdate=2008-02-13 |quote=All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing significant views fairly, proportionately and without bias.}}</ref> په هغو ليکنو کې چې د همدغې پاليسۍ او کړنلارې نه پکې سرغړنه شوې وي، بايد ژر تر ژره بدلون ومومي او يا هم ړنګې شي. [[په ويکيپېډيا کې ړنګېدنه او ګډېدنه|ړنګېدنه او ګډېدنه]] د سمون دوه هغه فلسفې دي چې د همدغو پر بنسټ په ويکيپېډيا کې ړنګېدنه او بدلون رامېنځ ته کېږي.<ref>{{cite news |title=The battle for Wikipedia's soul |url=http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10789354 |publisher=[[The Economist]] |date=2008-03-06 |accessdate=2008-03-07 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2007/10/11/dlwiki11.xml |title=Wikipedia: an online encyclopedia torn apart |date=2007-11-10 |accessdate=2008-03-11 |publisher=[[The Daily Telegraph]]}}</ref>
د ويکيپېډيا ټولنه د واک يو جوړښت هم لري.<ref name="iTWireJune18-2006">
{{cite news
|first=Stuart
|last=Corner
|title=What's all the fuss about Wikipedia?
|url=http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/4666/127/
|publisher=[[iT Wire]]
|date=[[June 18]], [[2006]]
|accessdate=2007-03-25}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.slate.com/id/2184487 |title=The Wisdom of the Chaperones |date=2008-02-22 |accessdate=2008-03-04 |first=Chris |last=Wilson |publisher=Slate}}</ref> While they are welcomed by the community,<ref name="TheNewYorker">
{{cite news
|first=Stacy
|last=Schiff
|title=Can Wikipedia conquer expertise?
|work =Know It All
|url=http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/07/31/060731fa_fact
|publisher =[[The New Yorker]]
|date =[[July 24]], [[2006]]
|accessdate=2007-03-25}}</ref> authors new to Wikipedia are encouraged to read policies to help them learn the ways of Wikipedia.<ref name="Torsten_Kleinz">{{cite news
|first=Torsten
|last=Kleinz
|title=World of Knowledge
|work =The Wikipedia Project
|url=http://w3.linux-magazine.com/issue/51/Wikipedia_Encyclopedia.pdf
|publisher=[[Linux Magazine]]
|date=February, 2005
|accessdate=2007-03-25}}</ref> Editors in good standing in the community can run for one of many of levels of volunteer stewardship; this begins with "[[sysop|administrator]]"<ref name="David_Mehegan">{{cite news
|first=David
|last=Mehegan
|title=Many contributors, common cause
|url=http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2006/02/13/many_contributors_common_cause/
|publisher=[[The Boston Globe]]
|date=[[February 13]], [[2006]]
|accessdate=2007-03-25}}</ref> and goes up with "steward" and "bureaucrat".<ref> [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:User_access_levels&oldid=100160162 Wikipedia:User access levels]," Wikipedia ([[January 12]] [[2007]])</ref> Administrators, the largest group of privileged users ({{srlink|Special:Statistics|1,503 Wikipedians}} for the English edition on [[February 23]], [[2008]]), have the ability to delete pages, lock articles from being changed in case of vandalism or editorial disputes, and deter users from editing. Much of the coordination of the editing of Wikipedia takes place on the "Talk" pages associated with each individual article.<ref>{{cite journal
|url=http://www.research.ibm.com/visual/papers/wikipedia_coordination_final.pdf
|author=Fernanda B. Viégas, Martin Wattenberg, Jesse Kriss, Frank van Ham
|title=Talk Before You Type: Coordination in Wikipedia
|publisher=Visual Communication Lab, IBM Research
|date=2007-01-03
|accessdate=2007-10-30}}</ref>
As Wikipedia grows with an unconventional model of encyclopedia building, "Who writes Wikipedia" has become one of questions frequently asked on the project, often with a reference to other Web 2.0 projects such as [[Digg]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.viktoria.se/altchi/submissions/submission_edchi_1.pdf |title=Power of the Few vs. Wisdom of the Crowd: Wikipedia and the Rise of the Bourgeoisie |first=Aniket |last=Kittur | accessdate =2008-02-23 |format=pdf}}</ref> Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, once argued that only "a community ... a dedicated group of a few hundred volunteers" makes up a bulk of contributions to Wikipedia and that the project is therefore "much like any traditional organization". This was later disputed by [[Aaron Swartz]], who noted that several articles he sampled had large portion of their content contributed by a user with low edit count.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whowriteswikipedia |title=Raw Thought: Who Writes Wikipedia? |first=Aaron |last=Swartz |accessdate=2008-02-23 |date=2006-09-04}}</ref>
== ساوترې او هډوترې ==
د ويکيپېډيا چلېدنه په [[ميډياويکي]] پورې اړه لري، ميډياويکي يو وړيا او د پرانيستې سرچينې د ويکي يو ساوتری دی چې په [[PHP]] کې ليکل شوی او په [[MySQL]] ډاټابېز باندې جوړ شوی دی. په همدغه ساوتری کې د ماکرو ژبې، د بېلابېلو واريابلونو، د کينډيو د ټرانسکلوژن د غونډال، د URL د بياسيخولو پروګرامي توکي سره راغونډشوي. ميډياويکي د جي ان يو (جنېرل پبلک لايسنس) د منښتليک له مخې د کارونکو مخ ته پروت ساوتری دی چې د ويکيپېډيا په ټولو پروژو کې او همدا شان د نورو ويکي ګانو په ګڼو پروژو هم کارېږي. په پيل کې ويکيپېډيا په [[UseModWiki]] چې په [[پېرل]] کې د کلېفورډ اډمز (I پړاو) لخوا ليکل شوی ؤ چلېده , which initially required [[CamelCase]] for article hyperlinks; the present double bracket style was incorporated later. Starting in January 2002 (Phase II), Wikipedia began running on a [[PhpWiki|PHP wiki]] engine with a MySQL database; this software was custom-made for Wikipedia by Magnus Manske. The Phase II software was repeatedly modified to accommodate the [[Exponential growth|exponentially increasing]] demand. In July 2002 (Phase III), Wikipedia shifted to the third-generation software, MediaWiki, originally written by Lee Daniel Crocker.
[[دوتنه:Wikimedia-servers-2006-05-09.svg|thumb|right|د غونډال د جوړښت يو منظر، د ۲۰۰۶ کال د می مياشت [[:meta:Server layout diagrams|په مېټاويکي کې د پالنګر د څېرو نخشه]].]]
Wikipedia currently runs on dedicated [[computer cluster|clusters]] of [[Linux|GNU/Linux]] servers, 300 in [[Florida]], 26 in [[Amsterdam]] and 23 in Yahoo!'s Korean hosting facility in [[Seoul]].<ref name="servers">{{cite web|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_servers|title=Wikimedia servers at wikimedia.org|accessdate=2008-02-16}}</ref> Wikipedia employed a single server until 2004, when the server setup was expanded into a distributed [[multitier architecture]]. In January 2005, the project ran on 39 [[Dedicated hosting service|dedicated servers]] located in Florida. This configuration included a single master [[database server]] running [[MySQL]], multiple slave database servers, 21 [[web server]]s running the [[Apache HTTP Server]], and seven [[Squid cache]] servers.
Wikipedia receives between 20,000 and 45,000 page requests per second, depending on time of day.<ref>"[http://toolserver.org/~leon/stats/reqstats/reqstats-monthly.png Monthly request statistics]", Wikimedia. Retrieved on [[2008-02-26]].</ref> Page requests are first passed to a front-end layer of [[Squid cache|Squid caching]] servers. Requests that cannot be served from the Squid cache are sent to load-balancing servers running the [[Linux Virtual Server]] software, which in turn pass the request to one of the Apache web servers for page rendering from the database. The web servers deliver pages as requested, performing page rendering for all the language editions of Wikipedia. To increase speed further, rendered pages for anonymous users are cached in a distributed memory cache until invalidated, allowing page rendering to be skipped entirely for most common page accesses. Two larger clusters in the Netherlands and Korea now handle much of Wikipedia's traffic load.
== په نورو ژبو ==
دا چې ويکيپېډيا يو انټرنټي پوهنغونډ دی او د ټولې نړۍ خلک ورته لاسرسی لري، نو کېدای شي چې د يوې ژبې ګډونوال د بېلابېلو ګړدودونو په کارولو سره او يا هم د بېلابېلو هېوادونو تر مېنځ (د ساري په توګه [[انګرېزي ويکيپېډيا|د انګرېزي ژبې ويکيپېډيا]]) د همغږۍ د نشتوالي په سبب په ويکيپېډيا کې ځينې توپيرونه رامېنځ ته کړي. چې همدا توپيرونه د سمې ليکلې بڼې <ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Spelling|title= spelling | work = Manual of Style | publisher = Wikipedia |accessdate=2007-05-19}}</ref> او نورو مطلبونو کې د شخړې او ناندريو سبب جوړېږي.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias|title=Countering systemic bias|accessdate=2007-05-19}}</ref>
{{ژباړل}}
Though the various language editions are held to global policies such as "neutral point of view," they diverge on some points of policy and practice, most notably on whether images that are not [[Free Content|licensed freely]] may be used under a claim of [[fair use]].<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
|title=Fair use
|publisher=Meta wiki
|accessdate=2007-07-14}}</ref><!--
--><ref>{{cite web
|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Images_on_Wikipedia
|title=Images on Wikipedia
|accessdate=2007-07-14}}</ref><!--
--><ref>{{cite journal
|url=http://www.research.ibm.com/visual/papers/viegas_hicss_visual_wikipedia.pdf
|author=Fernanda B. Viégas
|title=The Visual Side of Wikipedia
|publisher=Visual Communication Lab, IBM Research
|date=2007-01-03
|accessdate=2007-10-30}}</ref>
[[دوتنه:PercentWikipediasGraph.png|thumb|Percentage of all Wikipedia articles in English (red) and top ten largest language editions (blue). As of November 2007, less than 25% of Wikipedia
articles are in English.]] Jimmy Wales has described Wikipedia as "an effort to create and distribute a free encyclopedia of the highest possible quality to every single person on the planet in their own language".<ref>[[Jimmy Wales]], "[http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2005-March/020469.html Wikipedia is an encyclopedia]", March 8 2005, <wikipedia-l@wikimedia.org></ref> Though each language edition functions more or less independently, some efforts are made to supervise them all. They are coordinated in part by [[ويکيپېډيا:Meta|Meta-Wiki]], the Wikimedia Foundation's wiki devoted to maintaining all of its projects (Wikipedia and others). For instance, Meta-Wiki provides [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Statistics important statistics] on all language editions of Wikipedia and maintain a [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_articles_every_Wikipedia_should_have list of articles every Wikipedia should have]. The list concerns basic content by subject: biography, history, geography, society, culture, science, technology, foodstuffs, and mathematics. As for the rest, it is not rare for articles strongly related to a particular language not to have counterparts in another edition. For example, articles about small towns in the United States might only be available in English.
Translated articles represent only a small portion of articles in most editions,<ref>For example, "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Translation_into_English Translation into English]", Wikipedia. (March 9, 2005)</ref> in part because automated translation of articles is disallowed.<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Translations Wikipedia: Translation]. English Wikipedia, accessed on [[2007-02-03]]</ref> Articles available in more than one language may offer "[[InterWiki]]" links, which link to the counterpart articles in other editions. Images and other non-verbal media are shared among the various language editions through the [[Wikimedia Commons]] repository, a project operated by the Wikimedia foundation.
Several language versions have published a selection of Wikipedia articles on a DVD version. An English version<ref>"[http://www.wikipediaondvd.com/site.php?temp=down List of Mirrors Hosting the CD Iso.]" ''Wikipedia on DVD''. [[History of Wikipedia|Linterweb]]. Accessed 1 June 2007</ref> developed by [[History of Wikipedia|Linterweb]] contains "1964 + articles".<ref>"[http://www.wikipediaondvd.com/ Wikipedia on DVD]". Linterweb. Accessed 1 June 2007. "Linterweb is authorized to make a commercial use of the Wikipedia trademark restricted to the selling of the Encyclopedia CDs and DVDs."</ref><ref>"[http://www.wikipediaondvd.com/site.php?temp=buy Wikipedia 0.5 Available on a CD-ROM]". ''Wikipedia on DVD''. Linterweb. Accessed 1 June 2007. "The DVD or CD-ROM version 0.5 was commercially available for purchase."</ref> The Polish version contains nearly 240000 articles.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Polska_Wikipedia_na_DVD_%28z_Helionem%29/en |title=Polish Wikipedia on DVD}}</ref> There are also a few German versions.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia-Distribution |title=Wikipedia:DVD}}</ref>
== Reliability and bias ==
{{main|Reliability of Wikipedia}}
Wikipedia does not require that its contributors give their legal names or provide other information to establish their identity. A 2007 study by researchers from [[Dartmouth College]] found that anonymous and infrequent contributors to Wikipedia are as reliable a source of knowledge as those contributors who register with the site.<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=good-samaritans-are-on-the-money
|title=Wikipedia "Good Samaritans'' Are on the Money
|publisher=[[Scientific American]]
|date=[[2007-10-19]]}}</ref>
Although some contributors are authorities in their field, Wikipedia requires that even their contributions be supported by published and verifiable sources.
Wikipedia tries to address the problem of [[systemic bias]], and to deal with zealous editors who seek to influence the presentation of an article in a biased way, by insisting on a neutral point of view.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.alternet.org/story/61365/?page=entire
|title=Will Unethical Editing Destroy Wikipedia's Credibility?
|author=Eric Haas
|publisher=AlterNet.org
|date=[[2007-10-26]]}}</ref>
The English-language Wikipedia has introduced an assessment scale against which the quality of articles is judged;<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment
|title=Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment
|accessdate=2007-10-28}}</ref> other editions have also adopted this. Roughly 1500 articles have passed a rigorous set of criteria to reach the highest rank, "featured article" status; such articles are intended to provide thorough, well-written coverage of their topic, supported by many references to peer-reviewed publications.<ref>{{cite journal
|url=http://www.research.ibm.com/visual/papers/hidden_order_wikipedia.pdf
|author=Fernanda B. Viégas, Martin Wattenberg, and Matthew M. McKeon
|title=The Hidden Order of Wikipedia
|publisher=Visual Communication Lab, IBM Research
|date=2007-07-22
|accessdate=2007-10-30
|format=pdf}}</ref>
In a 2003 study of Wikipedia as a community, economics [[Doctor of Philosophy|Ph.D.]] student Andrea Ciffolilli argued that the low [[transaction cost]]s of participating in [[wiki]] software create a catalyst for collaborative development, and that a "creative construction" approach encourages participation.<ref>
Andrea Ciffolilli, "[http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_12/ciffolilli/index.html Phantom authority, self-selective recruitment and retention of members in virtual communities: The case of Wikipedia]", ''[[First Monday (journal)|First Monday]]'' December 2003.
</ref>
Economist Tyler Cowen writes, "If I had to guess whether Wikipedia or the median refereed journal article on economics was more likely to be true, after a not so long think I would opt for Wikipedia." He comments that many traditional sources of non-fiction suffer from systemic biases. Novel results are over-reported in journal articles, and relevant information is omitted from news reports. But he also cautions that errors are frequently found in Internet sites, and that academics and experts must be vigilant in correcting them.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.tnr.com/story.html?id=82eb5d70-13bd-4086-9ec0-cb0e9e8411b3
|title=Cooked Books
|author=Tyler Cowen
|publisher=The New Republic
|date=[[2008-3-14]]}}</ref>
In February 2007, an article in [[The Harvard Crimson]] newspaper reported that some of the professors at [[Harvard University]] do include Wikipedia in their syllabus, but that there is a split in their perception of using Wikipedia.<ref>Child, Maxwell L.,[http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=517305 "Professors Split on Wiki Debate"], The Harvard Crimson, Monday, February 26, 2007.</ref> In June 2007, former president of the [[American Library Association]] [[Michael Gorman (librarian)|Michael Gorman]] condemned Wikipedia, along with [[Google]],<ref name=stothart>Chloe Stothart, [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=209408 Web threatens learning ethos],
''The Times Higher Education Supplement'', 2007, '''1799''' (22 June), page 2</ref> stating that academics who endorse the use of Wikipedia are “the intellectual equivalent of a dietician who recommends a steady diet of Big Macs with everything.” He also said that “a generation of intellectual sluggards incapable of moving beyond the Internet” was being produced at universities. He complains that the web-based sources are discouraging students from learning from the more rare texts which are either found only on paper or are on subscription-only web sites. In the same article Jenny Fry (a research fellow at the [[Oxford Internet Institute]]) commented on the academics who cite Wikipedia that: “You cannot say children are intellectually lazy because they are using the Internet when academics are using search engines in their research,” she said. “The difference is that they have more experience of being critical about what is retrieved and whether it is authoritative. Children need to be told how to use the Internet in a critical and appropriate way.”<ref name=stothart />
Speaking at a conference in Pennsylvania, Wales said he receives about ten e-mails weekly from students saying they got failing grades on papers because they cited ''Wikipedia''. According to the ''Sunday Times'' of London, Wales told the students they got what they deserved. "For God's sake, you’re in college; don't cite the encyclopedia," he said.<ref>"Jimmy Wales," ''Biography Resource Center Online''. (Gale, 2006)</ref>
== پر ويکيپېډيا نيوکې ==
{{آرنی|پر ويکيپېډيا نيوکې}}
Wikipedia has been accused of exhibiting [[systemic bias]] and inconsistency;<ref name="Who">Simon Waldman, [http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2004/oct/26/g2.onlinesupplement Who knows?] ''The Guardian'', [[October 26]] [[2004]]</ref> critics argue that Wikipedia's open nature and a lack of proper sources for much of the information makes it unreliable.<ref>{{ cite news | author = Stacy Schiff | date = [[2006-07-31]] | title = Know It All | work = The New Yorker }}</ref> Some commentators suggest that Wikipedia is generally reliable, but that the reliability of any given article is not always clear.<ref name="AcademiaAndWikipedia" /> The project's preference for [[consensus]] over [[credential]]s has been labeled "anti-elitism".<ref name="SangerElitism">[[Larry Sanger]], [http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/12/30/142458/25 Why Wikipedia Must Jettison Its Anti-Elitism], [[Kuro5hin]], [[December 31]] [[2004]].</ref> Editors of traditional [[reference work]]s such as the ''[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]'' have questioned the project's utility and status as an encyclopedia.<ref name="McHenry_2004">[[Robert McHenry]], "[http://www.techcentralstation.com/111504A.html The Faith-Based Encyclopedia]", [[Tech Central Station]], [[November 15]] [[2004]].</ref> Many [[university]] [[lecturer]]s discourage students from citing any encyclopedia in [[Academia|academic work]], preferring [[primary source]]s;<ref name="WideWorldOfWikipedia">{{ cite web | title = Wide World of WIKIPEDIA | publisher = The Emory Wheel | url = http://www.emorywheel.com/detail.php?n=17902 | date = [[April 21]] [[2006]] | accessdate = 2007-10-17 }}</ref> some specifically prohibit Wikipedia citations.<ref>{{cite news |first=Scott |last=Jaschik |title=A Stand Against Wikipedia |url=http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki |publisher=Inside Higher Ed |date=[[2007-01-26]] |accessdate=2007-01-27 }}</ref> Co-founder [[Jimmy Wales]] stresses that encyclopedias of any type are not usually appropriate as primary sources, and should not be relied upon as authoritative.<ref name="AWorkInProgress">{{cite news |first=Burt |last=Helm |title= Wikipedia: "A Work in Progress" |url= http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/dec2005/tc20051214_441708.htm |publisher=[[BusinessWeek]] |date=[[2005-12-14]] |accessdate=2007-01-29 }}</ref> Technology writer [[Bill Thompson (technology writer)|Bill Thompson]] commented that the debate was possibly "symptomatic of much learning about information which is happening in society today."<ref>{{cite news |title=What is it with Wikipedia? |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4534712.stm |date=[[2005-12-16]] |publisher=[[British Broadcasting Company|BBC]] |first=Bill |last=Thompson}}</ref>
In order to improve reliability, some editors have called for "stable versions" of articles, or articles that have been reviewed by the community and locked from further editing – but the community has been unable to form a consensus in favor of such changes, partly because they would require a major software overhaul.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reviewed_article_version|title=meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reviewed_article_version<!--INSERT TITLE-->}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Stable_versions|title=en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Stable_versions<!--INSERT TITLE-->}}</ref> However a similar system is being tested on the German Wikipedia, and there is an expectation that some form of that system will make its way onto the English version at some future time.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Flagged_revisions|title=en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Flagged_revisions<!--INSERT TITLE-->}}</ref> Software created by Luca de Alfaro and colleagues at the University of California, Santa Cruz is now being tested that will assign "trust ratings" to individual Wikipedia contributors, with the intention that eventually only edits made by those who have established themselves as "trusted editors" will be made immediately visible.<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://technology.newscientist.com/article/mg19526226.200-wikipedia-20-%C3%A2-now-with-added-trust.html
|last=Giles
|first=Jim
|title=Wikipedia 2.0 - now with added trust
|date=2007-09-20
|publisher=NewScientist.com news service
}}</ref>
[[دوتنه:John Seigenthaler Sr. speaking.jpg|right|thumb|John Seigenthaler Sr. has described Wikipedia as "a flawed and irresponsible research tool."<ref name=Seigenthaler />]]
Concerns have also been raised regarding the lack of [[accountability]] that results from users' anonymity,<ref name="WikipediaWatch">[[Public Information Research]] - Wikipedia Watch. Retrieved on [[2007-01-28]].</ref> and that it is vulnerable to [[vandalism]] and similar problems. In one particularly well-publicized [[Seigenthaler incident|incident]], false information was introduced into the biography of [[John Seigenthaler, Sr.]] and remained undetected for four months.<ref name=Seigenthaler>{{cite news
|url=http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-11-29-wikipedia-edit_x.htm
|last=Seigenthaler
|first=John
|title=A False Wikipedia 'biography'
|date=2005-11-29
|publisher=USA Today
}}</ref> Some critics claim that Wikipedia's open structure makes it an easy target for Internet [[troll (Internet)|trolls]], [[Spam (electronic)|advertisers]], and those with an agenda to push.<ref>{{cite web
|title=Toward a New Compendium of Knowledge (longer version)
|url=http://www.citizendium.org/essay.html
|work=Citizendium.org
|accessdate=2006-10-10
}}</ref><ref name="Torsten_Kleinz">{{cite news
|first=Torsten
|last=Kleinz
|title=World of Knowledge
|work =The Wikipedia Project
|url=http://w3.linux-magazine.com/issue/51/Wikipedia_Encyclopedia.pdf
|publisher=[[Linux Magazine]]
|date=February, 2005
|accessdate=2007-07-13
|quote= The Wikipedia's open structure makes it a target for trolls and vandals who malevolently add incorrect information to articles, get other people tied up in endless discussions, and generally do everything to draw attention to themselves.
}}</ref> The addition of political [[Spin (public relations)|spin]] to articles by organizations including the [[United States House of Representatives|U.S. House of Representatives]] and special interest groups<ref name="DeathByWikipedia">{{cite web
|title=Death by Wikipedia: The Kenneth Lay Chronicles
|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/08/AR2006070800135.html
|accessdate=2006-11-01
|first=Frank
|last=Ahrens
|publisher=The Washington Post
|date=[[2006-07-09]]
}}</ref> has been noted,<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-6032713-7.html
|title=Politicians notice Wikipedia
|publisher=[[CNET Networks|CNET]]
|author=Kane, Margaret
|date=[[2006-01-30]]
|accessdate=2007-01-28
}}</ref> and organizations such as [[Microsoft]] have offered financial incentives to work on certain articles.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16775981/
|title=Microsoft offers cash for Wikipedia edit
|publisher=[[MSNBC]]
|author=Bergstein, Brian
|date=[[2007-01-23]]
|accessdate=2007-02-01
}}</ref> These issues have been parodied, notably by [[Stephen Colbert]] in ''[[The Colbert Report]]''.<ref name="wikiality">{{cite news
|title=Wikiality
|publisher=Comedycentral.com
|url=http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=72347
|author=Stephen Colbert
|date=[[2006-07-30]]
}}</ref>
Wikipedia's community has been described as "[[cult]]-like,"<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2005/dec/15/wikipedia.web20
|title=Log on and join in, but beware the web cults
|first=Charles |last=Arthur
|date=[[2005-12-15]]
|publisher= ''[[The Guardian]]''
}}</ref> although not always with entirely negative connotations,<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/08/03/wikipedia/index.html
|title=Wikipedia: The know-it-all Web site
|date=[[2003-08-04]]
|first=Kristie
|last=Lu Stout|publisher=[[CNN]]
}}</ref> and criticized for failing to accommodate inexperienced users.<ref>"{{cite web
|url=http://wikinfo.org/index.php/Critical_views_of_Wikipedia
|title=Critical views of Wikipedia
|author=[[Wikinfo]]
|date=[[2005-03-30]]
|accessdate=2007-01-29
}}</ref> While praising many aspects of Wikipedia, historian Roy Rosenzweig notes: "Overall, writing is the Achilles’ heel of Wikipedia. Committees rarely write well, and Wikipedia entries often have a choppy quality that results from the stringing together of sentences or paragraphs written by different people."<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://chnm.gmu.edu/resources/essays/d/42
|title=Can History be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past
|publisher=The Journal of American History Volume 93, Number 1 (June, 2006): 117-46
|author=Rosenzweig, Roy
|accessdate=2007-10-29
}}</ref>
In August 2007, a website developed by computer science graduate student [[Virgil Griffith]] named [[WikiScanner]] made its public debut. WikiScanner traces the source of millions of changes made to Wikipedia by editors who are not logged in, which reveals that many of these edits come from corporations or sovereign government agencies about articles related to them, their personnel or their work, and were attempts to remove criticism.<ref name="Seeing Corporate Fingerprints">{{cite news
|url=http://www10.nytimes.com/2007/08/19/technology/19wikipedia.html?_r=5&hp=&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
|title=Seeing Corporate Fingerprints From the Editing of Wikipedia
|first=Katie
|last=Hafner
|date=[[2007-08-19]]
|publisher=[[The New York Times]]
}}</ref>
Wales called WikiScanner "a very clever idea," and said that he was considering some changes to Wikipedia to help visitors better understand what information is recorded about them. "When someone clicks on ‘edit,’ it would be interesting if we could say, ‘Hi, thank you for editing. We see you’re logged in from ''[[The New York Times]]''. Keep in mind that we know that, and it’s public information,’" he said. "That might make them stop and think."<ref name="Seeing Corporate Fingerprints"/>
== کلتوري ارزښت ==
{{selfref|{{see also|Wikipedia:Wikipedia in the media}}}}
[[دوتنه:Webcomic xkcd - Wikipedian protester.png|thumb|300px|An [[xkcd]] strip entitled "Wikipedian Protester."]]
In addition to [[Logistic function|logistic growth]] in the number of its articles,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Modelling_Wikipedia%27s_growth |title=Wikipedia:Modelling Wikipedia's growth |accessdate=2007-12-22}}</ref> Wikipedia has steadily gained status as a general reference website since its inception in 2001.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=849 |title=694 Million People Currently Use the Internet Worldwide According To comScore Networks |date-2006-05-04 |accessdate=2007-12-16 |publisher=comScore |quote=Wikipedia has emerged as a site that continues to increase in popularity, both globally and in the U.S. }}</ref> According to [[Alexa Internet|Alexa]] and [[comScore]], Wikipedia is among the ten most visited websites world-wide.<ref name=AlexaTop500>{{cite web |url=http://www.alexa.com/site/ds/top_sites?ts_mode=global&lang=none |title=Top 500 |accessdate=2007-12-04 |publisher=[[Alexa Internet|Alexa]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.comscore.com/press/data.asp |title=comScore Data Center |date=October 2007 |accessdate=2008-01-19}}</ref> Of the top ten, Wikipedia is the only non-profit website. The growth of Wikipedia has been fueled by its dominant position in Google search results; about 50% of search engine traffic to Wikipedia comes from Google,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://weblogs.hitwise.com/leeann-prescott/2007/02/wikipedia_traffic_sources.html |title=Google Traffic To Wikipedia up 166% Year over Year |publisher=[[Hitwise]] |date=2007-02-16 |accessdate=2007-12-22}}</ref> a good portion of which is related to academic research.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://weblogs.hitwise.com/leeann-prescott/2006/10/wikipedia_and_academic_researc.html |title=Wikipedia and Academic Research |publisher=[[Hitwise]] |date=2006-10-17 |accessdate=2008-02-06}}</ref> In April 2007 the [[Pew Research Center|Pew]] Internet and American Life project found that one third of US Internet users consulted Wikipedia.<ref>{{cite web |first=Lee |last=Rainie |coauthor=Bill Tancer |title=Wikipedia users |publisher=[[Pew Research Center]] |work=Pew Internet & American Life Project |date=2007-12-15 |url=http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Wikipedia07.pdf |format=PDF |accessdate=2007-12-15 |quote=36% of online American adults consult Wikipedia. It is particularly popular with the well-educated and current college-age students.}}</ref> In October 2006 the site was estimated to have a hypothetical market value of $580 million if it ran ads.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.watchmojo.com/web/blog/?p=626
|title=What is Wikipedia.org’s Valuation?
|first=Ashkan
|last=Karbasfrooshan
|date=2006-10-26
|accessdate=2007-12-01}}</ref>
[[دوتنه:Wikipedia HE-MAN.jpg|300px|thumb|A [[parody]] comic of [[Skeletor]] [[Vandalism|vandalizing]] the article [[He-Man]].]]
Wikipedia's content has also been used in academic studies, books, conferences, and court cases.<ref>"[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_in_the_media Wikipedia:Wikipedia in the media]", Wikipedia</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200216886.pdf|title=Bourgeois ''et al'' v. Peters ''et al.''|format=PDF|accessdate=2007-02-06}}</ref> The [[Parliament of Canada]]'s website refers to Wikipedia's article on [[same-sex marriage]] in the "related links" section of its "further reading" list for the [[Civil Marriage Act]].<ref> [http://www.parl.gc.ca/LEGISINFO/index.asp?Session=13&query=4381&List=ot#2 C-38], LEGISINFO ([[March 28]] [[2005]])</ref> The encyclopedia's assertions are increasingly used as a source by organizations such as the U.S. Federal Courts and the [[World Intellectual Property Organization]]<ref name="WP_court_source">{{cite journal |last=Arias |first=Martha L. |date=[[2007-01-29]] |title=[http://www.ibls.com/internet_law_news_portal_view.aspx?s=latestnews&id=1668 Wikipedia: The Free Online Encyclopedia and its Use as Court Source] |journal=Internet Business Law Services}} (the name "''World Intellectual Property Office''" should however read "''World Intellectual Property Organization''" in this source)</ref> — though mainly for ''supporting information'' rather than information decisive to a case.<ref>{{cite news |last=Cohen |first=Noam |date=[[2007-01-29]] |title=Courts Turn to Wikipedia, but Selectively |url=http://www10.nytimes.com/2007/01/29/technology/29wikipedia.html?_r=5&ref=technology&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin |journal=New York Times}}</ref>
<!--
how is this relevant to Cultural Significance?
A French court has ruled that the Wikimedia Foundation is not legally liable for inaccurate or potentially defamatory information posted to the site.<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/02/AR2007110201339_Inform.html
|title=Wikipedia cleared in French defamation case
|publisher=Reuters
|date=2007-11-02
|accessdate=2007-11-02}}</ref>
-->
Wikipedia has also been used as a source in [[journalism]],<ref>{{cite news |title=Wikipedia in the Newsroom |url=http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4461 |date=[[February 2008|February]]/[[March 2008]] |publisher=[[American Journalism Review]] |first=Donna |last=Shaw |accessdate=2008-02-11}}</ref> sometimes without attribution, and several reporters have been dismissed for plagiarizing from Wikipedia.<ref>Shizuoka newspaper plagiarized Wikipedia article, ''Japan News Review'', [[July 5]] [[2007]]</ref><ref> "[http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA010307.02A.richter.132c153.html Express-News staffer resigns after plagiarism in column is discovered]", ''[[San Antonio Express-News]]'', [[January 9]] [[2007]].</ref><ref>"[http://starbulletin.com/2006/01/13/news/story03.html Inquiry prompts reporter's dismissal]", ''[[Honolulu Star-Bulletin]]'', [[January 13]] [[2007]].</ref>
In July 2007, Wikipedia was the focus of a 30 minute documentary on [[BBC Radio 4]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/factual/pip/efv21/|title=Radio 4 Documentary}}</ref> which argued that, with increased usage and awareness, the number of references to Wikipedia in popular culture is such that the term is one of a select band of 21st century nouns that are so familiar ([[Google]], [[Facebook]], [[YouTube]]) that they no longer need explanation and are on a par with such 20th century terms as [[The Hoover Company|Hoovering]] or [[Coca-Cola|Coke]]. Many parody Wikipedia's openness, with characters vandalizing or modifying the online encyclopedia project's articles. Notably, comedian [[Stephen Colbert]] has parodied or referenced Wikipedia on numerous episodes of his show ''[[The Colbert Report]]'' and coined the related term "[[wikiality]]".<ref name="wikiality" /> Websites such as [[Uncyclopedia]] have also been set up parodying Wikipedia; its [http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Main Page] claims that it is the "content-free encyclopedia that anyone can edit,"<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://uncyclopedia.org/index.php?title=Main_Page&oldid=1497858
|title=Main Page
|accessdate=2007-01-28
|date=[[2007-01-26]]
|work=Uncyclopedia
}}</ref> parodying the English Wikipedia's welcome message on its [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Main Page].
Wikipedia has also created an impact upon forms of media. Some media sources satirize Wikipedia's susceptibility to inserted inaccuracies, such as a front-page article in ''[[The Onion]]'' in July 2006 with the title "Wikipedia Celebrates 750 Years of American Independence",<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.theonion.com/content/node/50902 |title=Wikipedia Celebrates 750 Years Of American Independence |accessmonthday= [[October 15]] |accessyear=[[2006]] |year=2006 |work=[http://www.theonion.com/content/index The Onion]}}</ref> while others may draw upon Wikipedia's statement that anyone can edit, such as "[[The Negotiation]]", an episode of ''[[The Office (U.S. TV series)|The Office]]'', where character [[Michael Scott (The Office)|Michael Scott]] said that "Wikipedia is the best thing ever. Anyone in the world can write anything they want about any subject, so you know you are getting the best possible information", and a select few parody Wikipedia's policies, such as the ''xkcd'' strip named "Wikipedian Protester", that also included the joke "Semi-protect the Constitution!"
The first documentary film about Wikipedia, entitled ''[[Truth in Numbers: The Wikipedia Story]]'', is scheduled for 2008 release. Shot on several continents, the film will cover the history of Wikipedia and feature interviews with Wikipedia editors around the world.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikidocumentary.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page|title=wikidocumentary.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page<!--INSERT TITLE-->}}</ref><ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/03/11/PKGRJN87UI1.DTL| title=Industry Buzz| last=Hart| first=Hugh| date=[[March 11]], [[2007]]| publisher=[[San Francisco Chronicle|SFGate.com]]}}</ref>
On [[September 28]], [[2007]], Italian politician [[Franco Grillini]] raised a parliamentary question with the Minister of Cultural Resources and Activities about the necessity of [[Panoramafreiheit|freedom of panorama]]. He said that the lack of such freedom forced Wikipedia, "the seventh most consulted website" to forbid all images of modern Italian buildings and art, and claimed this was hugely damaging to tourist revenues.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.grillini.it/show.php?4885|title=Comunicato stampa. On. Franco Grillini. Wikipedia. Interrogazione a Rutelli. Con "diritto di panorama" promuovere arte e architettura contemporanea italiana. Rivedere con urgenza legge copyright|date=12 October 2007}}</ref>
On September 16, 2007, ''[[The Washington Post]]'' reported that Wikipedia has become a focal point in the 2008 election campaign, saying, "Type a candidate's name into Google, and among the first results is a Wikipedia page, making those entries arguably as important as any ad in defining a candidate. Already, the presidential entries are being edited, dissected and debated countless times each day."<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/16/AR2007091601699_pf.html
|title=On Wikipedia, Debating 2008 Hopefuls' Every Facet
|author=Jose Antonio Vargas
|publisher=The Washington Post
|date=2007-09-17}}
</ref> An October 2007 Reuters article, entitled "Wikipedia page the latest status symbol", reported the recent phenomenon of how having a Wikipedia article vindicates one's notability.<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2232893820071022?sp=true
|title=Wikipedia page the latest status symbol
|author=Jennifer Ablan
|publisher=Reuters
|date=2007-10-22
|accessdate=2007-10-24}}</ref>
Wikipedia won two major awards in May 2004.<ref>"[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Trophy_box Trophy Box]", [[ويکيپېډيا:Meta|Meta-Wiki]] ([[March 28]] [[2005]]).</ref> The first was a Golden Nica for Digital Communities of the annual [[Prix Ars Electronica]] contest; this came with a €10,000 (£6,588; $12,700) grant and an invitation to present at the PAE Cyberarts Festival in [[Austria]] later that year. The second was a Judges' [[Webby Awards|Webby Award]] for the "community" category.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.webbyawards.com/webbys/winners-2004.php|title=Webby Awards 2004|publisher=The International Academy of Digital Arts and Sciences|date=2004|accessdate=2007-06-19}}</ref> Wikipedia was also nominated for a "Best Practices" Webby. In September 2004, the [[Japanese Wikipedia]] was awarded a Web Creation Award from the Japan Advertisers Association. This award, normally given to individuals for great contributions to the Web in Japanese, was accepted by a long-standing contributor on behalf of the project.
In a 2006 ''Multiscope'' research study, the [[Dutch Wikipedia]] was rated the third best [[Dutch language]] site, after [[Google]] and [[Gmail]], with a score of 8.1.<ref> [http://www.multiscope.nl/organisatie/nieuws/sberichten/nederlandse-wikipedia-groeit-als-kool.html Nederlandse Wikipedia groeit als kool] (Website in Dutch Language), Recovered [[December 27]] [[2006]]</ref> On [[January 26]] [[2007]], Wikipedia was also awarded the fifth highest brand ranking by the readers of brandchannel.com, receiving 15% of the votes in answer to the question "Which brand had the most impact on our lives in 2006?"<ref>{{cite news |first=Anthony |last=Zumpano |title=Similar Search Results: Google Wins |url=http://www.brandchannel.com/features_effect.asp?pf_id=352 |publisher=[[Interbrand]] |date=[[2007-01-29]] |accessdate=2007-01-28 }}</ref> [[Jimmy Wales]] was named one of the 100 most influential people in the world by ''[[Time (magazine)|TIME Magazine]]'' in 2006.<ref>{{cite news |first=Chris |last=Anderson |title=Jimmy Wales |url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1187286,00.html |publisher=[[Time (magazine)|TIME]] |date=[[2006-04-30]] |accessdate=2006-12-18 }}</ref> In 2006 and 2007, the [[Russian Wikipedia]] won the "Science and education" category of the "[[Runet Prize]]" (Russian: ''[[:ru:Премия Рунета|Премия Рунета]]'') award, supervised<ref>{{ru icon}}[http://lenta.ru/news/2005/08/29/premia/ Major award of Russian Internet became a state one] — [[Lenta.Ru]], August 29 2005</ref> by the [[Politics of Russia|Russian government]] agency [[Rospechat|FAPMC]].
In November 2006, [[Turkish Wikipedia]] was nominated under the Science category for the ''Altın Örümcek Web Ödülleri'' (Golden Spider Web Awards), which are commonly known as the "Web Oscars" for Turkey. In January 2007, Turkish Wikipedia was given the award for "Best Content" in this competition. The award was given in a ceremony on [[January 25]] [[2007]] at Istanbul Technical University.
== ويکي يا او ويکيمېډيا ==
[[د ويکيمېډيا بنسټ]] د خپل د وېبځي کوربه توب او د کړۍ د پراخوالي لګښتونه د ويکي يا سره شريکوي. The Wikimedia Foundation received some donated office space from Wikia Inc. during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2006."<ref> [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/49/Wikimedia_2007_fs.pdf Wikimedia Foundation 2006-2007 Audit] page 9 says "The Organization shares hosting and bandwidth costs with Wikia, Inc., a for-profit company founded by the same founder as Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Included in accounts receivable at June 30, 2007 is $6,000 due from Wikia, Inc. for these costs. The Organization received some donated office space from Wikia Inc. during the year ended June 30, 2006 valued at $6,000. No donation of the office space occurred in 2007.
== اړونده پروژې ==
{{sisterlinks}}
A number of interactive multimedia encyclopedias incorporating entries written by the public existed long before Wikipedia was founded. The first of these was the 1986 [[BBC Domesday Project]], which included text (entered on [[BBC Micro]] computers) and photographs from over 1 million contributors in the [[United Kingdom|UK]], and covering the geography, art and culture of the UK. This was the first interactive multimedia encyclopedia (and was also the first major multimedia document connected through internal links), with the majority of articles being accessible through an interactive map of the UK. The user-interface and part of the content of the Domesday Project have now been emulated on a website.<ref name="Domesday Project">[http://www.domesday1986.com/ Web-based emulator of the Domesday Project User Interface] and data from the Community Disc (contributions from the general public) -- most articles can be accessed using the interactive map</ref> One of the most successful early online encyclopedias incorporating entries by the public was [[h2g2]], which was also created by the [[BBC]]. The h2g2 encyclopedia was relatively light-hearted, focusing on articles which were both witty and informative. Both of these projects had similarities with Wikipedia, but neither gave full editorial freedom to public users.
Wikipedia has also spawned several sister projects. The first, "''In Memoriam: September 11<!--Do not reformat this date, it is quoted--> Wiki''",<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.sep11memories.org/wiki/In_Memoriam|title=sep11memories.org/<!--INSERT TITLE-->|accessdate=2007-02-06}}</ref> created in October 2002,<ref>[http://www.sep11memories.org/index.php?title=In_Memoriam&oldid=1502 First edit to the wiki] In Memoriam: September 11 wiki ([[October 28]] [[2002]]),</ref> detailed the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]]; this project was closed in October 2006. [[Wiktionary]], a dictionary project, was launched in December 2002;<ref>"[http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_News&diff=prev&oldid=4133 Announcement of Wiktionary's creation]", [[December 12]] [[2002]]. Retrieved on [[2007-02-02]].</ref> [[Wikiquote]], a collection of quotations, a week after Wikimedia launched, and [[Wikibooks]], a collection of collaboratively written free books. Wikimedia has since started a number of other projects.<ref name="OurProjects">"[http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Our_projects Our projects]", [[Wikimedia Foundation]]. Retrieved on [[2007-01-24]]</ref>
A similar non-wiki project, the [[GNUPedia]] project, co-existed with Nupedia early in its history; however, it has been retired and its creator, [[free software]] figure [[Richard Stallman]], has lent his support to Wikipedia.<ref name="stallman1999" />
Other websites centered on collaborative [[knowledge base]] development have drawn inspiration from or inspired Wikipedia. Some, such as [[Susning.nu]], ''[[Enciclopedia Libre]]'', and [[WikiZnanie]] likewise employ no formal review process, whereas others use more traditional [[peer review]], such as ''[[Encyclopedia of Life]]'', ''[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]'', [[h2g2]] and [[Everything2]].
Jimmy Wales, the ''de facto'' leader of Wikipedia,<ref name="defactoleader">{{cite news
|first=Holden
|last=Frith
|url=http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article1571519.ece
|title=Wikipedia founder launches rival online encyclopedia
|publisher=''[[The Times]]''
|date=[[March 26]], [[2007]],
|accessdate=2007-06-27
|quote=<small>Wikipedia’s de facto leader, Jimmy Wales, stood by the site's format.</small>}}<small> — Holden Frith.</small></ref> said in an interview in regard to the online encyclopedia [[Citizendium]] which is overviewed by experts in their respective fields:<ref name=Orlowski18>
{{cite news
|first=Andrew
|last=Orlowski
|authorlink=Andrew Orlowski
|url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/18/sanger_forks_wikipedia/
|title=Wikipedia founder forks Wikipedia, More experts, less fiddling?
|publisher=''[[The Register]]''
|date=[[September 18]], [[2006]]
|accessdate=2007-06-27
|quote=<small>Larry Sanger describes the Citizendium project as a "progressive or gradual fork", with the major difference that experts have the final say over edits.</small>}}<small> — Andrew Orlowski.</small></ref> "We welcome a diversity of efforts. If Larry's project is able to produce good work, we will benefit from it by copying it back into Wikipedia."<ref name="JayLyman">
{{cite news
|first=Jay
|last=Lyman
|url=http://www.crmbuyer.com/story/53137.html
|title=Wikipedia Co-Founder Planning New Expert-Authored Site
|publisher=LinuxInsider
|date=September 20, 2006
|accessdate=2007-06-27}}</ref>
== دا هم وګورۍ ==
<!-- Please avoid adding links already in the text and accompanying templates below per guidelines (see WP:ALSO) -->
{{meta|List of Wikipedias}}
* [[USA Congressional staff edits to Wikipedia]]
* [[Googlepedia]]
* [[List of encyclopedias]]
* [[List of wikis]]
* [[Open content]]
* [[User-generated content]]
* [[ويکيپېډيا:About]]
* [[Self-reference]]
* {{srlink|Wikipedia:Press coverage}}
== نورې لوستنې ==
=== اکاديميکې زده کړې ===
* {{cite journal|author=Ulrike Pfeil, Panayiotis Zaphiris, and Chee Siang Ang|date=2006|title=Cultural differences in collaborative authoring of Wikipedia|journal=Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication|volume=12|issue=1|url=http://jcmc.indiana.edu./vol12/issue1/pfeil.html}}
* {{cite web|title=Do as I do: leadership in the Wikipedia|author=Joseph M. Reagle Jr.|url=http://reagle.org./joseph/2005/ethno/leadership.html|work=Wikipedia Drafts|date=2005}}
* {{cite journal |url=http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue12_4/wilkinson/index.html |title=Assessing the value of cooperation in Wikipedia |date=[[April 2007]] |first=Dennis M. |last=Wilkinson |co-author=Bernardo A. Huberman |journal=First Monday |volume=12 |issue=4 |accessdate=2008-02-22}}
* {{cite journal |url=http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue12_8/nielsen/index.html |title=Scientific citations in Wikipedia |date=[[August 2007]] |journal=First Monday |volume=12 |issue=8 |accessdate=2008-02-22 |first=Finn Årup |last=Nielsen}}
== سرچينې ==
{{reflist}}
* [http://chnm.gmu.edu/resources/essays/d/42 Essay about wikipedia]
* [http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21131 The Charms of Wikipedia] Nicholas Baker article on Wikipedia from ''[[The New York Review of Books]]''
[[وېشنيزه:د انټرنټ تاريخ]]
[[وېشنيزه:ويکيپېډيا]]
| 