Wikipedia and the Fickle Finger of Fame
October 22, 2007 |
Wikipedia is one of our great fixtures of Web 2.0 and a collective community that most of us prize highly. The site contains perhaps the Web's most comprehensive, accessible and detailed storehouse of information, if somewhat questioned due to credibility issues. For my part, Wikipedia is fairly indispensable and as correct as any textbook I ever read. One of the coolest things about Wikipedia is actually getting one's own page there. On the Internet, it is pretty well established that making the pages of Wikipedia pretty much defines “making it”.
I have covered Jimmy Wales' endeavors about as often as anyone, and I am still amazed at what he has accomplished. His efforts (or “art” as I affectionately call it) are all the more significant because of the manner in which he has accomplished it. In a real way Wales' Wikipedia is the model for collective quality and possibility. Wikia, the for profit wiki site, bears it's own weight now but not quite in the same way Wikipedia does.
An article in the NYT's prompted this latest article on one of my favorite subjects. In this story by Jennifer Ablan, the author illuminates the “haves and have not's” of Wiki-Web notoriety. Steve Knight, a musician who was recently added, said he was excited about the prospect of being considered notable enough to be on Wikipedia. As of this story there are 224,785 other biographies of living souls on the world famous site. Wikipedia is also one of the most visited sites with almost 53 million unique visitors in September alone, so a page there certainly does get attention.
Twisted Fate
However, nothing is set in stone for the “would be famous” of Wikipedia, as the system is set up with a history page – where previous versions are stored, and a discussion page – where contributors deal with changes or even the fate of potential biographies. One example of this dynamic is budding actress Chelsea Kate Isaacs who was a 12 year old hand model of repute. Someone created a page touting Chelsea as “1998's most desirable hand model in the U.S. and Canada”, but days after her unsuspected wiki-fame Chelsea's page was dumped by contributors. My friend Jimmy Wales told the NYT: “It can be an unpleasant experience if … it gets deleted because the (community) decides you aren't important enough.”
Wikipedia has come under some fire because of its vulnerability to sabotage and incorrect contributions to the “editable” articles. Jimmy was fairly forced to add a “watchdog” group of administrators to protect content and as Wikipedia continues to grow more safeguards may be needed. For me, just someone putting me on Wikipedia for a day would be a thrill (Jimbo), then I could take a screen shot to distribute to my friends and put on Flickr. As for Chelsea and others, I do not know what comfort or tag can be applied – Wiki-Fallen? Maybe someone should come up with a niche site for all the wiki-fallen called “Momentarily Famous People” or something?
