1. How can Wikipedia maintain and grow its ability to harness the crowdsourcing of its “Wikipedians” to maintain high quality (and quickly updated) content? If Wikipedia can demonstrate effectively the potency of innovation in a competitive weapon it will simultaneously create and destroy value. Firms must be able to innovate while also fending off competitor’s imitation attempts. A successful strategy requires both an effective offense and a hard to crack defense. The reason for Wikipedia’s success is because it did just that when Jimmy Wales launched Wikipedia the free online Multilanguage encyclopedia. Wikipedia moved away from Britannic and Microsoft’s propriety business models to an open source model powered by user generated content
…show more content…
What, if anything, should Wikipedia do to ensure that its articles indeed present a “neutral point of view”? Shouldn’t the crowdsourcing approach ensure objectivity? Does a “neutral point of view” matter to Wikipedia’s sustainability? Why or why not? Wikipedia should always support their articles with facts and obtain information from reputable sources. They should avoid any grey areas, as well as any bias, and not put out articles that are not proven to be true. Part of the reason Wikipedia is so popular is because it provides legit information and users feel the information is accurate because it often is, its no mistake that Wikipedia is reliable. In order for Wikipedia to present a neutral point of view they should gather information and strategically combine its research and portray it in the article as reliable, factual information that is not ones personal opinion but rather a strong accurate article that has been approved and accepted as neutral. Wikipedia’s crowdsourcing approach should ensure objectivity to ensure that users are getting the best experience as well as reputable information if not Wikipedia will loose users and it can cause a loss of users making it difficult for Wikipedia to survive against competitors, therefore a neutral point of view does matter to Wikipedia’s sustainability. The company runs on providing accurate, factual information that is true and based on facts, the second users think otherwise will be a step in the wrong direction …show more content…
How has the “long tail” affected Wikipedia? Wikipedia affected the Encyclopedia market by implementing incremental innovation. They took the industry and transformed in in their own way. They made it free for users and easy to use. The long tail affected Wikipedia by gaining the ability to attract many users to its platform and providing information that is accurate and easy to obtain. Wikipedia took the concept of Encyclopedia, which was a ton of books that were very expensive and substitute it for an economical form of obtaining information quickly and efficiently. Its search comes up in seconds and you have plenty of information at your disposal taking advantage of low cost virtual shelf space. Wikipedia took advantage of sophisticated search engines and inventory management software to match consumer demand with a wide supply of information. A great example of there innovation is when I type in a specific topic in Google one of the first sites that pops up is Wikipedia, and that is almost always the case no matter what I’m looking for. I also can say that I rarely encounter differences between Wikipedia information and other websites. Wikipedia has made me confident in there information and I use it often when
What, if anything, should Wikipedia do to ensure that its articles indeed present a “neutral point of view”? Shouldn’t the crowdsourcing approach ensure objectivity? Does a “neutral point of view” matter to Wikipedia’s sustainability? Why or why not? Wikipedia should always support their articles with facts and obtain information from reputable sources. They should avoid any grey areas, as well as any bias, and not put out articles that are not proven to be true. Part of the reason Wikipedia is so popular is because it provides legit information and users feel the information is accurate because it often is, its no mistake that Wikipedia is reliable. In order for Wikipedia to present a neutral point of view they should gather information and strategically combine its research and portray it in the article as reliable, factual information that is not ones personal opinion but rather a strong accurate article that has been approved and accepted as neutral. Wikipedia’s crowdsourcing approach should ensure objectivity to ensure that users are getting the best experience as well as reputable information if not Wikipedia will loose users and it can cause a loss of users making it difficult for Wikipedia to survive against competitors, therefore a neutral point of view does matter to Wikipedia’s sustainability. The company runs on providing accurate, factual information that is true and based on facts, the second users think otherwise will be a step in the wrong direction …show more content…
How has the “long tail” affected Wikipedia? Wikipedia affected the Encyclopedia market by implementing incremental innovation. They took the industry and transformed in in their own way. They made it free for users and easy to use. The long tail affected Wikipedia by gaining the ability to attract many users to its platform and providing information that is accurate and easy to obtain. Wikipedia took the concept of Encyclopedia, which was a ton of books that were very expensive and substitute it for an economical form of obtaining information quickly and efficiently. Its search comes up in seconds and you have plenty of information at your disposal taking advantage of low cost virtual shelf space. Wikipedia took advantage of sophisticated search engines and inventory management software to match consumer demand with a wide supply of information. A great example of there innovation is when I type in a specific topic in Google one of the first sites that pops up is Wikipedia, and that is almost always the case no matter what I’m looking for. I also can say that I rarely encounter differences between Wikipedia information and other websites. Wikipedia has made me confident in there information and I use it often when