Wikipedia is an online encyclopaedia, which contains open articles that can be edited by a number of users. The site prides itself on providing un-biases information from a neutral point of view (NPov). However, since the general public provides the majority of information, it is difficult to know how accurate the information truly is. The article that will be reviewed and analyzed contains information about the events of September 11, 2001 as well as how wiki can be used as a learning tool.
The opening line of the article states “the September 11 attacks were a series of four coordinated terrorist attacks launched by the Islamic terrorist group al-Qaeda upon the United States in New York City and the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area on Tuesday, September 11, 2001.” The article goes on to discuss the various events of the attacks, causalities, damage, motives of al-Qaeda as well as the aftermath of the events. However there is one important aspect missing: the notion of a conspiracy theory. What the article fails to mention is how some people believe this was a planned attack orchestrated by the United States government in order to scare the public into supporting a war in Iraq. This omission is addressed in the talk section of the article, however there is much debate if this aspect should be included within the text of the main article because it lacks creditable sources. Oddly enough it was because of this exclusion the article was not granted the status of being a “good article” after being nominated early this year.
A Newspaper article from the New York Times published on the ten year anniversary points out that although there is a wiki page for 9/11 Conspiracy Theories there is no mention of it in the main September 11, 2001 page or any hypertext to the page. The author mentions how there is a disconnect between the two related articles and suggests this maybe due the sensitivity of the event. The Times article goes on to inform readers how the wiki page has changed over the last ten years. One such change is the omission of subheadings that were once found on the page even days after the actual event, these headings include missing persons, opportunists, misinformation, and rumors. The article provides readers with the first line from the September 11th article on December 2001, which read: “what might well be the most devastating terrorist attack in the history of the world.” It is hard to image a more bias and leading opening line then that.
Another aspect of this article debated in the talk section is the belief there is too much weight to the hate crime section. However this section contains a mere two hundred words in an article containing nearly ten thousand. It is unclear by what standard this would be considered too much weight.
The two areas of contention mentioned in the talk sections, are not addressed within the article. It is unclear if these areas had been previously addressed but were then changed by the editors or if...