Thursday, February 26, 2015

Wikipedia vs Textbooks (Extended)

Step 7
I believe most of the article was taking the side of the Indians who were killed during the massacre.
 "There was a woman with an infant in her arms who was killed as she almost touched the flag of truce ... A mother was shot down with her infant; the child not knowing that its mother was dead was still nursing ... The women as they were fleeing with their babies were killed together, shot right through ... and after most all of them had been killed a cry was made that all those who were not killed or wounded should come forth and they would be safe. Little boys ... came out of their places of refuge, and as soon as they came in sight a number of soldiers surrounded them and butchered them there." However, one statement was kind of in defense of the soldiers. "I know the men did not aim deliberately and they were greatly excited. I don't believe they saw their sights. They fired rapidly but it seemed to me only a few seconds till there was not a living thing before us; warriors, squaws, children, ponies, and dogs ... went down before that unaimed fire."

Activity #4

“Wikipedia is a do-ocracy,” said Dr. James Heilman, an emergency room doctor from British Columbia, Canada, who leads the Wikiproject Medicine that keeps close watch on the most important public health articles, like Ebola Virus Disease. “Those who do the most, do have a greater influence.”

"The editors of Wikipedia’s Ebola page say they earned a place as one of those credible sources. To protect against misinformation, potential editors must suggest adds or changes to the article on a separately maintained page, where editors, frequently Dr. Heilman, review them and decide whether to incorporate them."

“A key group of us keep an eye on articles that have become more popular to make sure that Wikipedia’s most-read content is of a reasonably high standard,” Dr. Heilman said.







 

No comments:

Post a Comment