Wikipedia is a global website that has information. This information is used everyday daily. Some of this information is volunteered information from people. The real research is needed.
In a USA today article by John Seigenthaler. John Seigenthaler Sr. had a biography about his life on wikipedia.org. That was not the problem. The problem was the false statements that where stated on the international web encyclopedia. It also brought controversy if there should be a web encyclopedia controlled by the people.
The article from wikipedia stated that he was involved with President John F. Kennedy and younger brother Robert Kennedy's assassination, which where both false statements. At the age of 78 he was shocked and hurt because he was Robert Kennedy's administrative assistant. It also said in 1971 he moved to the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was against the United States which made him look even worse. In anger and feeling disrespected he called Jimmy Wales the founder of Wikipedia. He asked if he knew who wrote the statement and he said no. Still wondering and wanting to know who wrote the bad comments he went to bellsouth internet where the biographer was traced. Wales said they would be no help. Then sent lawsuits to bellsouth ,AOL and MCI Wikipedia.
After that event now people have to sign up to Wikipedia before writing any article. People can now be tracked easier. Probably that's what it seems. The person does not have to use a email but visitors can still edit information. What really is the change? Seigenthaler thinks that the new registration system will not be any change.
In an article by Anita Ramasastry she questions if it should be legal if a website should obtain lawsuits. She talks about how wikipedia is a website for the poeple. The website is a encyclopedia that anyone can edit. If that's the case is Wikipedia a legit encyclopedia. She also speaks about section 230 Immunity it is made for free expression on the internet. It was also made for congress to influence chat rooms and message boards.
In Wikipedia it speaks on John Seigenthaler. The man that was humiliated on the website has his own little biography now speaking the truth and stating his issue that came up with him and Wikipedia. Showing that the problem was fix and showing flaws of the website is very professional. The website can't make a change anyway because it is a website for the people not for one's personal interested.
for me Wikipedia is a good website. even if it had one flaw doesn't mean everything is a flaw. peoples opinion should be in a encyclopedia that can be upgraded so you can always see everyones opinion. which then you can decide what the word, subject or person means to you.
John Seigenthaler Sr.