Warning: Undefined array key "file" in /home/kristyro/public_html/wp-includes/media.php on line 1749
I’ve used Wikipedia my entire life. Even when teachers told me that it wasn’t a good idea to use Wikipedia, I still used it as a jumping off point to find other sources for projects. I even remember finding out that anyone could edit a Wikipedia page, then going onto random Wikipedia pages and adding things my friends and I thought were funny. Those changes never stayed, but it was entertaining when I was 13 years old.
This semester, we were tasked with finding an underdeveloped Wikipedia page and editing it. When we first began this assignment, my biggest worry was finding something I knew enough about to edit its Wikipedia page. One of my biggest insecurities is a self-conceived idea that I’m not informed enough about anything to do the type of editing that was asked of us, so this was kind of a nerve-wracking process for me.
I initially wanted to edit pages of movies, film directors, actors and writers I love, but I stayed away from that as I wanted to be sure that I was adding relevant information. I have plenty of irrelevant information and opinions stored in my head, but I don’t think Wikipedia is the best place to display those. My next thought was to edit something about my favorite sports teams, the Minnesota Vikings and Minnesota Twins. Again, I couldn’t think of anything relevant, fact-based and unwritten to add.
That led me to thinking about other topics I know a lot about, so I actually went with my place of business, Jimmy John’s Gourmet Sandwiches. I do remember the training saying to do our best to refrain from conflicts of interest, but thought that the Jimmy John’s Wikipedia page was perfectly underdeveloped for this assignment. I also didn’t see the harm or help of a conflict of interest by simply adding factual information that any random person could have pulled from the company’s website. I didn’t add any insider secrets or steps to methodology. I went simple with basic information about the Jimmy John’s menu.
My first priority was clearing my mind of everything I knew about Jimmy John’s and simply referring to the company’s website. To be completely honest, it was a bit intimidating looking at the “Talk” section and seeing comments saying that certain sections read as if they had been written by Jimmy John’s employees. That wasn’t my goal, but the “Talk” section was very helpful in my journey. I saw everything that had previously been discussed, even dating back to the late 2000s, though its lengthy periods between edits led me to believe that it wasn’t very active. Also, the most recent “Talk” edit prior to mine was in all capital letters and criticized the founder for his hunting escapades.
Thursday night, I wrote in the “Talk” section that I would be adding some information about the menu. When I returned 24 hours later to see if anyone had any input on my future edits, I was less than surprised that no comments had been added, so I went ahead and added my changes.
Again, I can’t exactly place my finger on why, but I found it really nerve-wracking. I wanted my changes to stay, as I assume all good-intentioned Wikipedia editors do, so I was very careful to stick to what I thought was Wikipedia’s rules in writing. I think I reread my edits about 100 times before finally accepting what I had written. I actually referred to the menu on the Jimmy John’s website to make all of my edits, refraining from adding anything that was not explicitly stated there.
I also made sure to add that citation at the end of my edit, which I found very easy. The citation was one of the things I was a bit scared of because I didn’t want to cite my source incorrectly. I think Wikipedia does a great job of making that nearly impossible.
Finally, I clicked publish, which was a relief, but I’m still checking to see if anyone has changed my work. At this moment, no one has, but I’m probably going to continue to check the page and add it to my Wikipedia Watchlist. I don’t see any reason for it to be removed, but if it is, I’ll accept that gracefully.
I think the most difficult part of the entire process is adhering to Wikipedia’s rules and getting over the psychological battle I have with myself about being completely accurate and voiceless. I will say that my biggest takeaway from this experience is that it’s pretty easy to make the changes once you understand the rules. The training made it easy for me to understand how to make the changes, so when I’m surfing Wikipedia and come across something I know to be incorrect in the future, I’m likely to change it because of this experience.
It turns out that Wikipedia is just like life. If you’re a good communicator, you respect your peers, and you follow the rules, you’ll have an easier time.
