Archive:Stories: Difference between revisions

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 -->
+{{cquote|Wikipedia is sometimes criticized for having content that is constantly changed/updated by many different sources.  People seem to want a static leather-bound book of "final-word knowledge" written by a gray-haired expert.
+I'm a scientist, though, and my world is all about challenging existing theories and continuously working to improve our understanding of the universe around and within us.  There is no final word for scientists.
+We work as a *community,* not as isolated mad scientists in gloomy castles as portrayed in movies.  A few of us are crackpots, but the review process weeds out bad science.
+Wikipedia appears to operate on much the same principle - many authors, peer review, and constantly updated.  That's just as it should be!
+I've found the Wikipedia articles about subjects in which I'm expert to be good.  Wikipedia is, for me, a great introductory-level source for subjects in which I am NOT expert.  I can follow up on the cited references, Google, or use other citation databases to find the original primary source papers when I want greater depth on specific points.
+Bottom line:  Thank you, Wikipedia.  You do a great thing.  Keeping Wikipedia free to the public is important to me because knowledge is power - power that should be available to *every* child with curiosity about the world into which they are journeying. }}
+<hr>
 {{cquote|As a present for my 39th birthday, my older brother created for me my own Wikipedia page in Hebrew. I translate Japanese literature. You could Google my name before and find something, but if I tell people I'm in Wikipedia, they go "Wow".
 It IS wow.