A humble 98 posts and 20,000 views later, this research weblog will soon be rounding off its first year. A recent article by design writer and critic, Rick Poynor, has made me think again about the very first article I wrote back in January. Mr. Poynor remarks justly on the subject of ‘Encyclopedia Erratica’ or to resume, the lack of rigour amongst would-be journalists within the World of ‘write-it-yourself’ encyclopedias. The obvious problems that information such as this transpires and indeed may perspire is complicated even further by the ability to rewrite entries with little and often no editorial at hand. Mr. Poynor comments on the particular entry for ‘Graphic Design’.
“The text as a whole is a mess: a jumble of amateurish history writing, superfluous technical details, and waffle. Wikipedia is supposed to distill collective wisdom: The entry was started on December 16, 2001, by a contributor called “Wojpob” and between then and August 24, 2007, it was edited 1,657 times.”
When I began researching on the topic of motion design, Wikipedia’s entry not only demonstrated a lack of thorough background knowledge, it also revealed a complete misunderstanding of the terms motion graphics and motion design. It confused rather than infused knowledge. The invitation to write up a better article on Wikipedia has been proposed and one may equally conclude after reading Mr. Poynor’s article that he too should take up an open invite to putting the record straight. Will he, will I ? Personally I won’t and that may be interpreted as a means to understand where I stand on the issue of Wikipedia. To be clear though, I believe that such an open project on ‘all-around education’ is to be taken lightly – as lightly as some of the Wikiauthors’ use of language.