https://blogs.slj.com/neverendingsearch ... a-shaming/
That article is deadly typical of how a millennial sees WP--with blind favorability. Reasoning with them is hopeless as I learned the hard way many years ago. It's not helped by the fact that WP has a LOT of really good content, thus complicating any judgment of its value. In this crevice many weird subcultures and personality cults can thrive. (WP is a little of each plus a giant videogame--the "encyclopedia content" is merely the attractant. And make no mistake, it is a beast that Google helped to build and is openly exploited by Google whenever possible. Googling references and info may or may NOT be any better than looking it up on WP.)
As she says, the current crop of schoolchildren are mostly unimpressed with WP. Being young and "impressionable", they simply don't know yet. This is not unusual for "Generation Alpha". It's been said before; they are not interested in taking WP at its phony face value as a "glorious resource", nor for doing "free labor" for a "free project", whether actually free or not. They tend to take the often-insane nonsense they see on Tiktok or other social media as "fact" instead.
And using WP for hard references is better than stupidly believing anything you find in there, which is where those now-aging millennials come in. It's hilarious that Ms. Valenza (a "well trained professional" who works for Rutgers University) is less critical of WP's value and reliability than these students.
Really wish she would stop tossing that stupid word around: "WIKINESS". Not helpful, but does tend to indicate she might be a longtime WP editor, or even an insider, that we haven't run across yet. Knowing any of their stupid propagandistic jargon is a red flag that something else is going on here.
Oh btw: she's deeply involved in the "Wiki Ed" project. And I mean DEEPLY. Albeit only recently.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ring_2023)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... Fall_2023)
She has an account but hasn't used it to edit content. The account that we know of.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RULibraryProf
And Wiki Ed gives her silly op-ed as a "reliable reference". Right next to very old blatherings by deep WP insiders like Joe Reagle, Erik Möller and Gerard Meijssen. I have some very uncomplementary things to say about all three of them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... e_articles
