1

Pillars of Wikipedia

Ibekeme Merit Kosisochukwu

Fundamental Pillars of Wikipedia

There are five pillars of Wikipedia:

This means Wikipedia:

• Combines many features of general and specialized encyclopedias, almanacs and gazettes.

​

Is not:

• An advertising platform
• An indiscriminate collection of information
• A web directory
• A dictionary, newspaper nor a collection of source documents (although some Wikimedia projects are)

#1

Wikipedia is a free encyclopaedia

This means:

• Avoid advocacy (by characterizing information issues rather than debating them).
• Describe multiple points of view, presenting each accurately in context rather than as “the truth” or “the best view”.
• All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, reliable citing, and authoritative sources, especially when the topic is controversial or is about a person.
• Editor’s personal experiences or opinions matter less on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia is written from a neutral viewpoint

#2

This means:

• No editor owns an article since all editors license their work to the public.
• Copyright laws should be respected without plagiarizing from any sources.
• All editors are to always strive to find alternatives first, even though borrowing non-free media is sometimes allowed as fair use
• Editor’s personal experiences or opinions matter less on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia is free content that anyone can use, edit, and distribute

#3

This means:

• All editors own other Wikipedians respect, even when disagreements abound.
• Wikipedia etiquette are to be applied without engaging in personal attacks.
• Being open and welcoming to newcomers
• Discussing conflicts calmly on the talk pages, following dispute resolution procedures, and considering there are 6,659,324 other articles on the English Wikipedia to improve and discuss.

Wikipedia’s editors should treat each other with respect and civility

#4

This means:

• Irrespective of Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines, their content and interpretation can evolve over time.
• Wikipedia principles and spirit matter more than literal wording, and improving the it sometimes entails making exceptions.
• Being bold, but not reckless in updating articles.
• Worrying less over making mistakes that can easily be corrected, since every past version of each article is saved.

Wikipedia no firm rules

#5

What would the community become?

What would happen to the projects?

Imagine if editors focused on four or less than four of the pillars

#1

• It would probably become more of a social media outlet, news source, or even a free hosting server.
• That would not be good for Wikipedia

What would happen if we stopped having Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia?

​

#2

• The articles would start to contain opinions, or be used as a political tool.
• This would inhibit Wikipedia from becoming better

What would become of Wikipedia if editors stopped writing from a neutral point of view?

​

#3

• That would reduce global enthusiasm, thereby weaken Wikipedia

What would become of Wikipedia if we no longer create free content?

​

#4

• We would content with the risk of driving away volunteers on the community.

If we stopped treating each other with respect and civility, how would that affect Wikipedia?

​

#5

• We would become machines rather than a collaborative process (as seen in German Wikipedia).
• That too will not make Wikipedia better.

If firm rules were created and stuck with, how would that affect Wikipedia?

​

Going by all these questions, you will notice that none of the pillars are mutually exclusive.

We need them all if we are to achieve the objective for which the community was started.

Thank you