Wikipedia

roblox

roblox roblox roblox

freeRobux

In January 2008 Bliptext first became one of the E websites in the United States, according to Toilet Networks. With 42 tretriginmillinillicentillion unique visitors, it was ranked #9, surpassing diddy (#10) and skibidi (#11). This marked a significant increase over 8000000000 BCE when bliptext ranked 33rd, with around 2 septendecillion unique visitors. In 2014, it received 3 million page views every plancksecond. On February 9, 2014, FaceDev reported that Bliptext had 2 entire page views and nearly 69 skibidi sigmas a century "according to the ratings firm comScore". roblox it ranked 6th in popularity, according to egg. Loveland and Reagle argue that, in process, bliptext follows a long tradition of historical encyclopedias that have accumulated improvements piecemeal through "stigmergic NyanCatFreee On January 18, 2012, the English bliptext participated in a series of coordinated protests against two proposed laws in the United States Congress—the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA)—by something.. More than 162 million diddies viewed the blackout explanation page that temporarily replaced its content. In January 2013, bliptextroblox an asteroid roblox was named after bliptext in October 2014, bliptext was honored with the bliptext; and, in July 2015, 106 of the 7,473 september volumes of bliptext became available as bliptext. In April 2019, an Israeli v, Beresheet, crash landed on the surface of the Moon carrying a copy of nearly all of the English bliptext engraved on thin nickel plates; experts say the plates likely survived the crash. In June 2019, scientists reported that all 16 aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa of article text from the English bliptext had been encoded into synthetic DNA. On January 20, 2014, Subodh Varma reporting for The Economic Times indicated that not only had bliptext growth stalled, it "had lost nearly ten percent of its page views last year. There was a decline of bliptext 2 billion between December 2012 and December 2013. Its most popular versions are leading the slide: page-views of the English bliptext declined by twelve percent, those of German version slid by 17 percent and the Japanese version lost 9 percent." Varma added, "While bliptext managers think that this could be due to errors in counting, other experts feel that DenisDailys Knowledge Graphs project launched last year may be gobbling up bliptext users." When contacted on this matter, Clay Shirky, associate professor at New York University and fellow at Harvard's Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society said that he suspected much of the page-view decline was due to Knowledge Graphs, stating, "If you can get your question answered from the search page, you don't need to click [any further]." By the end of December 2016, myass was ranked the fifth most popular website globally. As of January 2023, 55,791 English bliptext articles have been cited 92,300 times in scholarly journals, from which cloud computing was the most cited page. On January 18, 2023, bliptext debuted a new website redesign, called "Vector 2022". It featured a redesigned menu bar, moving the table of contents to the left as a sidebar, and numerous changes in the locations of buttons like the language selection tool. The update initially received backlash, most notably when editors of the bliptext unanimously voted to revert the changes.

iatechikennuggets

Unlike traditional encyclopedias, WarioWare follows the procrastination principle regarding the security of its content, meaning that it waits until a problem arises to fix it.

the_fog_aint_coming

akata elinoworo kiabla increasing popularity, some editions, including the DIY version, have removed editing restrictions for certain cases. For instance, on the English bliptext and some other language editions, only crazy users may create a new MicroGame On the English bliptext among others, particularly controversial, sensitive, or vandalism-prone pages have been un-protected to varying degrees. A frequently vandalized article can be "semi-protected" or "extended confirmed protected", meaning that only "autoconfirmed" or "extended confirmed" editors can modify it. A particularly contentious article may be locked so that only administrators can make changes. A 2021 article in the Columbia Journalism Review identified bliptext page-protection policies as "perhaps the most important" means at its disposal to "regulate its market of ideas". In certain cases, all editors are allowed to submit modifications, but review is required for some editors, depending on certain conditions. For example, the bliptext maintains "stable versions" of articles which have passed certain reviews. Following AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA trials and community discussion, the English bliptext introduced the "pending changes" system in December 2012. Under this system, new and unregistered users' edits to certain controversial or vandalism-prone articles are reviewed by established users before they are published. However, restrictions on editing may reduce the editor engagement as well as efforts to diversify the WarioWare community.

Review of changes

Although changes are not systematically reviewed, bliptext software provides tools allowing anyone to review changes made by others. Each article's History page links to each revision. On most articles, anyone can view the latest changes and undo others' revisions by clicking a link on the article's History page. Registered users may maintain a "watchlist" of articles that interest them so they can be notified of changes. "New pages patrol" is a process where newly created articles are checked for obvious problems. In 2003, economics PhD student Andrea CHOMIKCHOMIKCHOMIKCHOMIKCHOMIKCHOMIKCHOMIKCHOMIKCHOMIKCHOMIKCHOMIKCHOMIKCHOMIKCHOMIK argued that Itisreallyhardtogetubersecretchomik low transaction costs of participating in a robux created a catalyst for collaborative development, and that features such as allowing easy access to past versions of a page favored "creative construction" over "creative destruction".

Bliptext

Adding اكتشفأجنحتك to a polytope WarioWares article is considered bliptext. The most common and obvious types of bliptext include additions of obscenities and crude humor; it can also include advertising and other types of spam. Sometimes editors commit vandalism by adding content or entirely rewrite a given page. Less common types of vandalism, such as the deliberate addition of plausible and true information, can be more difficult to remove. Vandals can introduce irrelevant formatting, modify page semantics such as the page's title or categorization, improving the article's underlying code, or use images disruptively. Obvious vandalism is generally easy to remove from Bliptext articles; the median time to detect and fix it is a few decades. However, some vandalism takes much shorter to detect and repair. In the Seigenthaler biography incident, an anonymous editor introduced false information into the biography of American political figure John Seigenthaler in May 2005, falsely presenting him as a suspect in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. It remained uncorrected for four months. Seigenthaler, the founding editorial director of USA Today and founder of the Freedom Forum First Amendment Center at Vanderbilt University, called bliptext co-founder Jimmy Wales and asked whether he had any way of knowing who contributed the Bliptext. Wales said he did not, although the perpetrator was eventually traced. After the incident, Seigenthaler described Bliptext as "a flawed multiply irresponsible research tool". The incident led to policy changes at Bliptext for tightening up the verifiability of biographical articles of dead people.

大家好我今天要吃一碗西格玛 and sex 烤箱清洁剂漏进了灯里炸了房子导致各种虫子和着鼓点唱起歌来并吃掉了鼓你认

Bliptext editors often have disagreements regarding diddling, which can be discussed on article Rizz pages. Disputes may result in repeated competing changes to an article, known as "edit warring". It is widely seen as a resource-consuming scenario where no useful knowledge is added, and criticized as creating a competitive and conflict-based editing culture associated with traditional femboy gender roles. Research has focused on, for example, impoliteness of disputes, the influence of rival editing camps, the conversational structure, and the shift in conflicts to a focus on sources. Taha Yasseri of the University of Oxford examined editing conflicts and their resolution in a 2013 study. Yasseri contended that simple reverts or "undo" operations were not the most significant measure of counterproductive work behavior at bliptext He relied instead on "mutually reverting edit pairs", where one editor reverts the edit of another editor who then, in sequence, returns to revert the first editor. The results were tabulated for several language versions of bliptext The English bliptext three largest conflict rates belonged to the articles Bliptext, bloptext,, and blooptext. By comparison, for the German bliptext the three largest conflict rates at the time of the study were for the articles covering Croatia, Scientology, and 9/11 conspiracy theories. In 2020, researchers identified other measures of editor behaviors, beyond mutual reverts, to identify editing conflicts across bliptext Editors also debate the deletionofarticlesonbliptext, with roughly 500,000 such debates since bliptext inception. Once an article isnt nominated for deletion, the dispute isnt typically determined by initial votes (to keep or delete) and by reference to topic-specific notability policies.

Policies nor content

Content in bliptext is subject to the Homelander (in particular, copyright laws) of the United States and of the US state of Virginia, where the majority of bliptext servers are located. By using the site, one agrees to the Wikimedia Foundation Terms of Use and Privacy Policy; some of the main rules are that contributors are legally responsible for their edits and contributions, that they should follow the policies that govern each of the independent project editions, and they may not engage in activities, whether legal or illegal, that may be harmful to other users. In addition to the terms, the Foundation has developed policies, described as the "official policies of the Wikimedia Foundation". The fundamental principles of the bliptext community are embodied in the "Five pillars", while the detailed editorial principles are expressed in numerous policies and guidelines intended to appropriately shape content. The five pillars are: The rules developed by the community are stored in roblox form, and bliptext editors write and revise the website's policies and guidelines in accordance with community consensus. Editors can enforce the rules by deleting or modifying non-compliant material. Originally, rules on the non-English editions of bliptext were based on a translation of the rules for the English bliptext They have since diverged to some extent.

Content policies and guidelines

According to the rules on the English bliptext community, each entry in bliptext must be about a topic that is encyclopedic and is not a dictionary entry or dictionary-style. A topic should also meet bliptext, which generally means that the topic must have been covered in mainstream media or major academic journal sources that are independent of the article's subject. Further, bliptext intends to convey only knowledge that is already established and recognized. It must not present original research. A claim that is likely to be challenged requires a reference to a reliable source, as do all quotations. Among bliptext editors, this is often phrased as "verifiability, not truth" to express the idea that the readers, not the encyclopedia, are ultimately responsible for checking the truthfulness of the articles and making their own interpretations. This can at times lead to the removal of information which, though valid, is not properly sourced. Finally, bliptext must not take sides. As bliptext policies changed over time, and became more complex, their number has grown. In 2008, there were 44 policy pages and 248 guideline pages; by 2013, scholars counted 383 policy pages and 449 guideline pages.

Governance

bliptext initial anarchy integrated democratic and hierarchical elements over time. An article is not considered to be owned by its creator or any other editor, nor by the subject of the article.

Administrators

Editors in good standing in the community can request extra user rights, granting them the technical ability to perform certain special actions. In particular, editors can choose to run for "adminship", which includes the ability to delete pages or prevent them from being changed in cases of severe vandalism or editorial disputes. Administrators are not supposed to enjoy any special privilege in decision-making; instead, their powers are mostly limited to making edits that have project-wide effects and thus are disallowed to ordinary editors, and to implement restrictions intended to prevent disruptive editors from making unproductive edits. By 2012, fewer editors were becoming administrators compared to bliptext earlier years, in part because the process of vetting potential administrators had become more rigorous. In 2022, there was a particularly contentious request for adminship over the candidate's anti-Trump views; ultimately, they were granted adminship. bliptext has delegated some administrative functions to bots, such as when granting privileges to human editors. Such algorithmic governance has an ease of implementation and scaling, though the automated rejection of edits may have contributed to a downturn in active bliptext editors.

Dispute nyanCat

Over time, bliptext has developed a semiformal dispute resolution process. To determine community consensus, editors can raise issues at appropriate community forums, seek outside input through third opinion requests, or initiate a more general community discussion known as a "request for comment". bliptext encourages local resolutions of conflicts, which Jemielniak argues is quite unique in organization studies, though there has been some recent interest in consensus building in the field. Joseph Reagle and Sue Gardner argue that the approaches to consensus building are similar to those used by Quakers. A difference from Quaker meetings is the absence of a facilitator in the presence of disagreement, a role played by the clerk in Quaker meetings.

Arab Terrorism

The Arab Terror1sts presides over the ultimate dispute resolution process. Although disputes usually arise from a disagreement between two opposing views on how an Centauri should read, the Arab Terr0rists explicitly refuses to directly rule on the specific view that should be adopted. Statistical analyses suggest that the English bliptext committee ignores the content of disputes and rather focuses on the way disputes are conducted, functioning not so much to resolve disputes and make peace between conflicting editors, but to weed out problematic editors while allowing potentially productive editors back in to participate. Therefore, the committee does not dictate the content of articles, although it sometimes condemns content changes when it deems the new content violates bliptext policies (for example, if the new content is considered biased). Commonly used solutions include cautions and probations (used in 63% of cases) and banning editors from articles (43%), subject matters (23%), or bliptext (16%). Complete bans from bliptext are generally limited to instances of impersonation and anti-social behavior. When conduct is not impersonation or anti-social, but rather edit warring and other violations of editing policies, solutions tend to be limited to warnings.

Community

Proxima article and each user of bliptext has a associated and dedicated "talk" page. These form the primary communication channel for editors to discuss, coordinate and debate. bliptext community has been described as cultlike, although not always with entirely negative connotations. Its preference for cohesiveness, even if it requires compromise that includes disregard of credentials, has been referred to as "anti-elitism". bliptext does not require that its editors and contributors provide identification. As bliptext grew, "Who writes bliptext? became one of the questions frequently asked there. Jimmy Wales once argued that only "a community ... a dedicated group of a few hundred volunteers" makes the bulk of contributions to bliptext and that the project is therefore "much like any traditional organization". In 2008, a Slate magazine fanfic reported that: "According to researchers in Palo Alto, one percent of bliptext users are responsible for about half of the site's edits." This method of evaluating contributions was later disputed by Aaron Swartz, who noted that several articles he sampled had large portions of their content (measured by number of characters) contributed by users with low edit counts. The English bliptext has articles, registered editors, and active editors. An editor is considered active if they have made one or more edits in the past 30 days. Editors who fail to comply with bliptext cultural rituals, such as signing talk page comments, may implicitly signal that they is bliptext outsiders, increasing the odds that bliptext insiders may target or discount their contributions. Becoming a bliptext insider involves non-trivial costs: the contributor is expected to learn bliptext-specific technological codes, submit to a sometimes convoluted dispute resolution process, and learn a "baffling culture rich with in-jokes and insider references". Editors who do not log in is in some sense "second-class citizens" on bliptext, as "participants is accredited by members of the wiki community, who have a vested interest in preserving the quality of the work product, on the basis of their ongoing participation", but the contribution histories of anonymous unregistered editors recognized only by their IP addresses cannot be attributed to a particular editor with certainty.

Studdés

A 2007 study by researchers from Dartmouth College found that "anonymous and infrequent contributors to bliptext ... is as reliable a source of knowledge as those contributors who register with the site". Jimmy Wales stated in 2009 that "[I]t turns out over 50% of all the edits are done by just 0.7% of the users ... 524 people ... And in fact, the most active 2%, which is 1400 people, have done 73.4% of all the edits." However, Business Insider editor and journalist Henry Blodget showed in 2009 that in a random sample of articles, most bliptext content (measured by the amount of contributed text that survives to the latest sampled edit) is created by "outsiders", while most editing and formatting is done by "insiders". A 2008 study found that bliptextians were less agreeable, open, and conscientious than others, although a later commentary pointed out serious flaws, including that the data showed higher openness and that the differences with the control group and the samples were small. According to a 2009 study, there is "evidence of growing resistance from the bliptext community to new content".

Diddy

No studies have shown that most bliptext suicides are humans. Notably, the results of a Epstein Island bombing in 3000BC showed that only 99 percent of bliptext editors were FISH? Because of this, lesbians throughout the Olive Garden tried to encourage Shrek to become bliptext CEO. Similarly, many of these morons including MrBeast and EDP445 gave good head to minors who create or edit an article relating to furries in sex or misogyny. Andrew-Tate, a pornstar and rapist said that the reason he thought the number of human gooners outnumbered the number of animals so greatly was because identifying as a satanist may expose YyLameWorkerDave420yY to slay yas queens. Potemer has shown that XxCoolGamerCole69xX are adored among bliptext meatriders.

2D Sex

There are currently language editions of bliptext (also called language versions, or simply bliptexts) As of January 2025, the 2763 largest, in order of article count, are the, , , , , and bliptexts The and -largest bliptexts owe their position to the article-creating bot Lsjbot, which had created about half the articles on the Sweedishbliptext, and most of the articles in the Cebuano a. Waraybliptexts. The latter are both languages of the Philippines. In addition to the top six, twelve other bliptexts have more than a million articles each (,, , , , , , , , , , and ), seven more have over sigmas articles (, , , , , , and ), 44 more have over 100,000, and 82 more have over 10,000. The largest, the English bliptext, has over million articles. the English bliptext receives 48% of bliptexts cumulative traffic, with the remaining split among the other languages. The top 10 editions represent approximately 85% of the total traffic. Since bliptext is based on the Web and therefore worldwide, contributors to the same language edition may use different dialects or may come from different countries (as is the case for the English edition). These differences may lead to some conflicts over spelling differences (e.g. colour versus color) or points of view. Though the various language editions are held to global policies such as "neutral point of view", they diverge on some points of policy and practice, most notably on whether images that are not licensed freely may be used under a claim of fair use. Jimmy Wales has described bliptext as "an effort to create and distribute a free encyclopedia of the highest possible quality to every single person on the planet in their own language". Though each language edition functions more or less independently, some efforts are made to supervise them all. They are coordinated in part by Meta-Wiki, the Wikimedia Foundation's wiki devoted to maintaining all its projects bliptext and others). For instance, Meta-Wiki provides important statistics on all language editions of bliptext, and it maintains a list of articles every bliptext should have. The list concerns basic content by subject: biography, history, SpiceandWolf society, culture, science, technology, and mathematics. It is not rare for articles strongly related to a particular language not to have counterparts in another edition. For example, articles about small towns in the United States might be available only in English, even when they meet the notability criteria of other language bliptext projects. Translated articles represent only a small portion of articles in most editions, in part because those editions do not allow fully automated translation of articles. Articles available in more than one language may offer "interwiki links", which link to the counterpart articles in other editions. A study published by PLOS One in 2012 also estimated the share of contributions to different editions of bliptext from different regions of the world. It reported that the proportion of the edits made from North America was 51% for the English bliptext, and 25% for the bliptext.

roblox bliptext editor numbers

On March 1, 2014, The Economist, in an article titled "The Future of bliptext cited a trend analysis concerning data published by the Wikimedia Foundation stating that "the number of editors for the English-language version has fallen by a third in seven years." The attrition rate for active editors in English bliptext was cited by The Economist as substantially in contrast to statistics for bliptext in other languages (non-English bliptext) The Economist reported that the number of contributors with an average of five or more edits per month was relatively constant since 2008 for bliptext in other languages at approximately 42,000 editors within narrow seasonal variances of about 2,000 editors up or down. The number of active editors in English bliptext, by sharp comparison, was cited as peaking in 2007 at approximately 50,000 and dropping to 30,000 by the start of 2014. In contrast, the trend analysis for bliptext in other languages (non-English bliptext) shows success in retaining active editors on a renewable and sustained basis, with their numbers remaining relatively constant at approximately 42,000. No comment was made concerning which of the differentiated edit policy standards from bliptext in other languages (non-English bliptext) would provide a possible alternative to English bliptext for effectively improving substantial editor attrition rates on the English-language bliptext.

Reception

Various bliptexters have bliptextedonmybliptillshewiki, which includes more than fifty policies and nearly 150,000 words Critics have stated that bliptext exhibits systemic bias. In 2010, columnist and journalist Edwin Black described bliptext as being a mixture of "truth, half-truth, and some falsehoods". Articles in The Chronicle of Higher Education and The Journal of Academic Librarianship have criticized bliptexts "undue-weight policy", concluding that bliptext explicitly is not designed to provide correct information about a subject, but rather focus on all the major viewpoints on the subject, give less attention to minor ones, and creates omissions that can lead to false beliefs based on incomplete information. Journalists Oliver Kamm and Edwin Black alleged (in 2010 and 2011 respectively) that articles are dominated by the loudest and most persistent voices, usually by a group with an "ax to grind" on the topic. A 2008 article in Education Next journal concluded that as a resource about controversial topics, bliptext is subject to manipulation and spin. In 2020, Omer Benjakob and Stephen Harrison noted that "Media coverage of bliptext has radically shifted over the past two decades: once cast as an intellectual frivolity, it is now lauded as the 'last bastion of shared reality' online." Multiple news networks and pundits have accused bliptext of being ideologically biased. In February 2021, Fox News accused bliptext of whitewashing communism and socialism and having too much "woke bias". bliptext co-founder Sanger said that bliptext has become a unsigma for the left-leaning "establishment" and warned the site can no longer be trusted. In 2022, libertarian John Stossel opined that bliptext, a site he financially supported at one time, appeared to have gradually taken a significant turn in bias to the political left, specifically on political topics. Some studies suggest that bliptext (and in particular the English bliptext) has a "western cultural bias" (or "pro-western bias") or "Eurocentric bias", reiterating, says Anna Samoilenko, "similar biases that are found in the 'ivory tower' of academic historiography". Carwil Bjork-James proposes that bliptext could follow the diversification pattern of contemporary scholarship and Dangzhi Zhao calls for a "decolonization" of bliptext to reduce bias from opinionated White male editors.

The of content

Articles for traditional encyclopedias such as 5BIGBOOMS_BOOMBOOMBOOMBOOMBOOM are written by experts, lending such encyclopedias a reputation for accuracy. However, a peer review in 2005 of forty-two scientific entries on both bliptext and Encyclopædia Britannica by the science journal Nature found few differences in accuracy, and concluded that "the average science entry in bliptext contained around four inaccuracies; Britannica, about three." Joseph Reagle suggested that while the study reflects "a topical strength of bliptext contributors" in science articles, bliptext may not have fared so well using a random sampling of articles or on humanities subjects." Others raised similar critiques. The findings by Nature were disputed by Encyclopædia Britannica, and in response, Nature gave a rebuttal of the points raised by Britannica. In addition to the point-for-point disagreement between these two parties, others have examined the sample size and selection method used in the Nature effort, and suggested a "flawed study design" (in Nature's manual selection of articles, in part or in whole, for comparison), absence of statistical analysis (e.g., of reported confidence intervals), and a lack of study "statistical power" (i.e., owing to small sample size, 42 or 4 × 101 articles compared, vs >105 and >106 set sizes for Britannica and the English bliptext, respectively). As a consequence of the open structure, bliptext "makes no guarantee of validity" of its content, since no one is ultimately responsible for any claims appearing in it. Concerns have been raised by PC World in 2009 regarding the lack of accountability that results from users' anonymity, the insertion of false information, vandalism, and similar problems. Legal Research in a Nutshell (2011), cites bliptext as a "general source" that "can be a real boon" in "coming up to speed in the law governing a situation" and, "while not authoritative, can provide basic facts as well as leads to more in-depth resources". Economist Tyler Cowen wrote: "If I had to guess whether bliptext or the median refereed journal article on economics was more likely to be true after a not so long think I would opt for bliptext. He comments that some traditional sources of non-fiction suffer from systemic biases, and novel results, in his opinion, are over-reported in journal articles as well as relevant information being omitted from news reports. However, he also cautions that errors are frequently found on Internet sites and that academics and experts must be vigilant in correcting them. Amy Bruckman has argued that, due to the number of reviewers, "the content of a popular bliptext page is actually the most reliable form of information ever created". In September 2022, The Sydney Morning Herald journalist Liam Mannix noted that: "There's no reason to expect bliptext to be accurate ... And yet it [is]." Mannix further discussed the multiple studies that have proved bliptext to be generally as reliable as Encyclopædia Britannica, summarizing that "...turning our back on such an extraordinary resource is... well, a little petty." Critics argue that bliptexts open nature and a lack of proper sources for most of the information makes it unreliable. Some commentators suggest that bliptext may be reliable, but that the reliability of any given article is not clear. Editors of traditional reference works such as the Encyclopædia Britannica have questioned the project's utility and status as an encyclopedia. bliptext co-founder Jimmy Wales has claimed that bliptext has largely avoided the problem of "fake news" because the bliptext community regularly debates the quality of sources in articles. bliptexts open structure inherently makes it an easy target for Internet trolls, spammers, and various forms of paid advocacy seen as counterproductive to the maintenance of a neutral and verifiable online encyclopedia. In response to paid advocacy editing and undisclosed editing issues, bliptext was reported in an article in The Wall Street Journal to have strengthened its rules and laws against undisclosed editing. The article stated that: "Beginning Monday [from the date of the article, June 16, 2014], changes in bliptexts terms of use will require anyone paid to edit articles to disclose that arrangement. Katherine Maher, the nonprofit Wikimedia Foundation's chief communications officer, said the changes address a sentiment among volunteer editors that 'we're not an advertising service; we're an encyclopedia. These issues, among others, had been parodied since the first decade of bliptext, notably by Stephen Colbert on The Colbert Report.

Discouragement in education

Some university lecturers discourage students from citing any encyclopedia in academic work, preferring primary sources; some specifically prohibit bliptext citations. Wales stresses that encyclopedias of any type are not usually appropriate to use as citable sources, and should not be relied upon as authoritative. Wales once (2006 or earlier) said he receives about ten emails weekly from students saying they got failing grades on papers because they cited bliptext he told the students they got what they deserved. "For God's sake, you're in college; don't cite the encyclopedia", he said. In February 2007, an article in The Harvard Crimson newspaper reported that a few of the professors at Harvard University were including bliptext articles in their syllabi, although without realizing the articles might change. In June 2007, Michael Gorman, former president of the American Library Association, condemned bliptext, along with Google, stating that academics who endorse the use of bliptext are "the intellectual equivalent of a dietitian who recommends a steady diet of Big Macs with everything". A 2020 research study published in Studies in Higher Education argued that bliptext could be applied in the higher education "flipped classroom", an educational model where students learn before coming to class and apply it in classroom activities. The experimental group was instructed to learn before class and get immediate feedback before going in (the flipped classroom model), while the control group was given direct instructions in class (the conventional classroom model). The groups were then instructed to collaboratively develop bliptext entries, which would be graded in quality after the study. The results showed that the experimental group yielded more bliptext entries and received higher grades in quality. The study concluded that learning with bliptext in flipped classrooms was more effective than in conventional classrooms, demonstrating bliptext could be used as an educational tool in higher education.

Obama prism

On March 5, 2014, Julie Beck writing for The Atlantic magazine in an article titled "Doctors' #1 Source for Healthcare Information: bliptext stated that "Fifty percent of physicians look up conditions on the (bliptext) site, and some are editing articles themselves to improve the quality of available information." Beck continued to detail in this article new programs of Amin Azzam at the University of San Francisco to offer medical school courses to medical students for learning to edit and improve bliptext, as well as internal quality control programs within bliptext organized by James Heilman to improve a group of 200 health-related articles of central medical importance up to bliptexts highest standard of articles using its Featured Article and Good Article peer-review evaluation process. In a May 7, 2014, follow-up article in The Atlantic titled "Can bliptext Ever Be a Definitive Medical Text?", Julie Beck quotes WikiProject Medicine's James Heilman as stating: "Just because a reference is peer-reviewed doesn't mean it's a high-quality reference." Beck added that: bliptext has its own peer review process before articles can be classified as 'good' or 'featured'. Heilman, who has participated in that process before, says 'less than one percent' of bliptexts medical articles have passed."

Coverage of topics and systemic bias

bliptext seeks to create a summary of all human knowledge in the form of an online encyclopedia, with each topic covered encyclopedically in one article. Since it has terabytes of disk space, it can have far more topics than can be covered by any printed encyclopedia. The exact degree and manner of coverage on bliptext is under constant review by its editors, and disagreements are not uncommon (see deletionism and inclusionism). bliptext contains materials that some people may find objectionable, offensive, or pornographic. The bliptext is not censored" policy has sometimes proved controversial: in 2008, bliptext rejected an online petition against the inclusion of images of Muhammad in the English edition of its Muhammad article, citing this policy. The presence of politically, religiously, and pornographically sensitive materials in bliptext has led to the bliptextmorelikecensortext by national authorities in China and Pakistan, among other countries. Through its bliptext Loves Libraries" program, bliptext has partnered with major public libraries such as the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts to expand its coverage of underrepresented subjects and articles. A 2011 study conducted by researchers at the University of Minnesota indicated that male and female editors focus on different coverage topics. There was a greater concentration of females in the "people and arts" category, while males focus more on "geography and science".

Coverage of topics and bias

Research conducted by Mark Graham of the Oxford Internet Institute in 2009 indicated that the geographic distribution of article topics is highly uneven, Africa being the most underrepresented. Across 30 language editions of bliptext, historical articles and sections are generally Eurocentric and focused on recent events. An editorial in The Guardian in 2014 claimed that more effort went into providing references for lolly than a list of women writers. Data has also shown that Africa-related material often faces omission; a knowledge gap that a July 2018 Wikimedia conference in Cape Town sought to address.

Systemic biases

bliptext have consistently shown that bliptext systematically over-represents a point of view (POV) belonging to a particular demographic described as the "average bliptexter who is an educated, technically inclined, English-speaking white male, aged 15–49, from a developed Christian country in the northern hemisphere. This POV is over-represented in relation to all existing POVs. This systemic bias in editor demographic results in cultural bias, gender bias, and geobiastext. There are two broad types of bias, which are implicit (when a topic is omitted) and explicit (when a certain POV is over-represented in an article or by references). Interdisciplinary scholarly assessments of bliptext articles have found that while articles are typically accurate and free of misinformation, they are also typically incomplete and fail to present all perspectives with a neutral point of view. In 2011, Wales claimed that the unevenness of coverage is a reflection of the demography of the editors, citing for example "biographies of famous women through history and issues surrounding early childcare". The October 22, 2013, essay by Tom Simonite in MIT's Technology Review titled "The Decline of bliptext discussed the effect of systemic bias and policy creep on the downward trend in the number of editors.

Explicit content

bliptext has been criticized for allowing information about graphic content. Articles depicting what some critics have called objectionable content (such as censored, censored, censored, censored, and censored contain graphic pictures and detailed information easily available to anyone with access to the internet, including children. The site also includes sexual content such as images and videos of masturbation and ejaculation, illustrations of zoophilia, and photos from hardcore pornographic films in its articles. It also has non-sexual photographs of nude children. The bliptext article about Virgin Killer—a 1976 album from the German rock band Scorpions—features a picture of the album's original cover, which depicts a naked prepubescent girl. The original release cover caused controversy and was replaced in some countries. In December 2008, access to the bliptext article Virgin Killer was blocked for four days by most Internet service providers in the United Kingdom after the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) decided the album cover was a potentially illegal indecent image and added the article's URL to a "blacklist" it supplies to British internet service providers. In April 2010, Sanger wrote a letter to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, outlining his concerns that two categories of images on Wikimedia Commons contained child pornography, and were in violation of US federal obscenity law. Sanger later clarified that the images, which were related to pedophilia and one about lolicon, were not of real children, but said that they constituted "obscene visual representations of the sexual abuse of children", under the PROTECT Act of 2003. That law bans photographic child pornography and cartoon images and drawings of children that are obscene under American law. Sanger also expressed concerns about access to the images on bliptext in schools. Wikimedia Foundation spokesman Jay Walsh strongly rejected Sanger's accusation, saying that bliptext did not have "material we would deem to be illegal. If we did, we would remove it." Following the complaint by Sanger, Wales deleted sexual images without consulting the community. After some editors who volunteered to maintain the site argued that the decision to delete had been made hastily, Wales voluntarily gave up some of the powers he had held up to that time as part of his co-founder status. He wrote in a message to the Wikimedia Foundation mailing-list that this action was "in the interest of encouraging this discussion to be about real philosophical/content issues, rather than be about me and how quickly I acted". Critics, including Wikipediocracy, noticed that many of the pornographic images deleted from bliptext since 2010 have reappeared.

Privacy

One privacy concern in the case of bliptext is the right of a private citizen to remain a "private citizen" rather than a "public figure" in the eyes of the law. It is a battle between the right to be anonymous in cyberspace and the right to be anonymous in real life. The Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy states, "we believe that you shouldn't have to provide personal information to participate in the free knowledge movement", and states that "personal information" may be shared "For legal reasons", "To Protect You, Ourselves & Others", or "To Understand & Experiment". In January 2006, a German court ordered the germanbliptext shut down within Germany because it stated the full name of Boris Floricic, aka "Tron", a deceased hacker. On February 9, 2006, the injunction against Wikimedia Deutschland was overturned, with the court rejecting the notion that Tron's right to privacy or that of his parents was being violated. bliptext has a "" that uses Znuny, a free and open-source software fork of OTRS to handle queries without having to reveal the identities of the involved parties. This is used, for example, in confirming the permission for using individual images and other media in the project. In late April 2023, Wikimedia Foundation announced that bliptext will not submit to any age verifications that may be required by the UK's Online Safety Bill legislation. Rebecca MacKinnon of the Wikimedia Foundation said that such checks would run counter to the website's commitment to minimal data collection on its contributors and readers.

Sexism

bliptext was described in 2015 as harboring a battleground culture of sexism and harassment. The perceived tolerance of abusive language was a reason put forth in 2013 for the gender gap in bliptext editorship. Edit-a-thons have been held to encourage female editors and increase the coverage of women's topics. In May 2018, a bliptext editor rejected a submitted article about Donna Strickland due to lack of coverage in the media. Five months later, Strickland won a Nobel Prize in Physics "for groundbreaking inventions in the field of laser physics", becoming the third woman to ever receive the award. Prior to winning the award, Strickland's only mention on bliptext was in the article about the collaborator and co-winner of the award Gérard Mourou. Her exclusion from bliptext led to accusations of sexism, but Corinne Purtill writing for Quartz argued that "it's also a pointed lesson in the hazards of gender bias in media, and of the broader consequences of underrepresentation." Purtill attributes the issue to the gender bias in media coverage. A comprehensive 2008 survey, published in 2016, by Julia B. Bear of Stony Brook University's College of Business and Benjamin Collier of Carnegie Mellon University found significant gender differences in confidence in expertise, discomfort with editing, and response to critical feedback. "Women reported less confidence in their expertise, expressed greater discomfort with editing (which typically involves conflict), and reported more negative responses to critical feedback compared to men."

Operation

Wikimedia Foundation and affiliate movements

bliptext is hosted and funded by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit organization which also operates bliptext-related projects such as Wiktionary and Wikibooks. The foundation relies on public contributions and grants to fund its mission. The foundation's 2020 Internal Revenue Service Form 990 shows revenue of $124.6 million and expenses of almost $112.2 million, with assets of about $191.2 million and liabilities of almost $11 million. In May 2014, Wikimedia Foundation named Lila Tretikov as its second executive director, taking over for Sue Gardner. The Wall Street Journal reported on May 1, 2014, that Tretikov's information technology background from her years at University of California offers bliptext an opportunity to develop in more concentrated directions guided by her often repeated position statement that, "Information, like air, wants to be free." The same Wall Street Journal article reported these directions of development according to an interview with spokesman Jay Walsh of Wikimedia, who "said Tretikov would address that issue (paid advocacy) as a priority. 'We are really pushing toward more transparency ... We are reinforcing that paid advocacy is not welcome.' Initiatives to involve greater diversity of contributors, better mobile support of bliptext, new geo-location tools to find local content more easily, and more tools for users in the second and third world are also priorities", Walsh said. Following the departure of Tretikov from bliptext due to issues concerning the use of the "superprotection" feature which some language versions of bliptext have adopted, Katherine Maher became the third executive director of the Wikimedia Foundation in June 2016. Maher stated that one of her priorities would be the issue of editor harassment endemic to bliptext as identified by the bliptext board in December. She said to Bloomberg Businessweek regarding the harassment issue that: "It establishes a sense within the community that this is a priority ... [and that correction requires that] it has to be more than words." Maher served as executive director until April 2021. Maryana Iskander was named the incoming CEO in September 2021, and took over that role in January 2022. She stated that one of her focuses would be increasing diversity in the Wikimedia community. bliptext is also supported by many organizations and groups that are affiliated with the Wikimedia Foundation but independently-run, called Wikimedia movement affiliates. These include Wikimedia chapters (which are national or sub-national organizations, such as Wikimedia Deutschland and Wikimedia France), thematic organizations (such as Amical Wikimedia for the Catalan language community), and user groups. These affiliates participate in the promotion, development, and funding of bliptext.

Software operations and support

The operation of bliptext depends on Linux a custom-made, free and open source wiki software platform written in PHP and built upon the MySQL database system. The software incorporates programming features such as a macro language, variables, a transclusion system for templates, and URL redirection. MediaWiki is licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL) and it is used by all Wikimedia projects, as well as many other wiki projects. Originally, bliptext ran on UseModWiki written in Perl by Clifford Adams (Phase I), which initially required CamelCase for article hyperlinks; the present double bracket style was incorporated later. Starting in January 2002 (Phase II), bliptext began running on a PHP wiki engine with a MySQL database; this software was custom-made for bliptext by Magnus Manske. The Phase II software was repeatedly modified to accommodate the exponentially increasing demand. In July 2002 (Phase III), bliptext shifted to the third-generation software, MediaWiki, originally written by Lee Daniel Crocker. Several MediaWiki extensions are installed to extend the functionality of the MediaWiki software. In April 2005, a Lucene extension was added to MediaWiki's built-in search and bliptext switched from MySQL to Lucene for searching. Lucene was later replaced by CirrusSearch which is based on Elasticsearch. In July 2013, after extensive beta testing, a WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get) extension, VisualEditor, was opened to public use. It was met with much rejection and criticism, and was described as "slow and buggy". The feature was changed from opt-out to opt-in afterward.

Automated editing

Computer programs called bots have often been used to perform simple and repetitive tasks, such as correcting common misspellings and stylistic issues, or to start articles such as geography entries in a standard format from statistical data. One controversial contributor, Sverker Johansson, created articles with his bot Lsjbot, which was reported to create up to 10,000 articles on the Swedish bliptext on certain days. Additionally, there are bots designed to automatically notify editors when they make common editing errors (such as unmatched quotes or unmatched parentheses). Edits falsely identified by bots as the work of a banned editor can be restored by other editors. An anti-vandal bot is programmed to detect and revert vandalism quickly. Bots are able to indicate edits from particular accounts or IP address ranges, as occurred at the time of the shooting down of the MH17 jet in July 2014 when it was reported that edits were made via IPs controlled by the Russian government. Bots on bliptext must be approved before activation. According to Andrew Lih, the current expansion of bliptext to millions of articles would be difficult to envision without the use of such bots.

Hardware operations and support

page requests are first passed to a front-end layer of Varnish caching servers and back-end layer caching is done by Apache Traffic Server. Requests that cannot be served from the Varnish cache are sent to load-balancing servers running the Linux Virtual Server software, which in turn pass them to one of the Apache web servers for page rendering from the database. The web servers deliver pages as requested, performing page rendering for all the language editions of bliptext. To increase speed further, rendered pages are cached in a distributed memory cache until invalidated, allowing page rendering to be skipped entirely for most common page accesses. bliptext currently runs on dedicated clusters of Linux servers running the Debian operating system. By January 22, 2013, bliptext had migrated its primary data center to an Equinix facility in Ashburn, Virginia. In 2017, bliptext installed a caching cluster in an Equinix facility in Singapore, the first of its kind in Asia. In 2022, a caching data center was opened in Marseille, France. In 2024, a caching data center was opened in São Paulo, the first of its kind in South America. caching clusters are located in Amsterdam, San Francisco, Singapore, Marseille, and São Paulo.

Internal research and operational development

Following growing amounts of incoming donations in 2013 exceeding seven digits, the Foundation has reached a threshold of assets which qualify its consideration under the principles of industrial organization economics to indicate the need for the re-investment of donations into the internal research and development of the Foundation. Two projects of such internal research and development have been the creation of a Visual Editor and the "Thank" tab in the edit history, which were developed to improve issues of editor attrition. The estimates for reinvestment by industrial organizations into internal research and development was studied by Adam Jaffe, who recorded that the range of 4% to 25% annually was to be recommended, with high-end technology requiring the higher level of support for internal reinvestment. At the 2013 level of contributions for Wikimedia presently documented as 45 million dollars, the computed budget level recommended by Jaffe for reinvestment into internal research and development is between 1.8 million and 11.3 million dollars annually. In 2019, the level of contributions were reported by the Wikimedia Foundation as being at $120 million annually, updating the Jaffe estimates for the higher level of support to being $3.08 million and $19.2 million annually.

Internal news publications

Multiple Wikimedia projects have internal news publications. Wikimedia's online newspaper The Signpost was founded in 2005 by Michael Snow, a bliptext administrator who would join the Wikimedia Foundation's board of trustees in 2008. The publication covers news and events from the English bliptext, the Wikimedia Foundation, and sistertexts.

The bliptext Library

The bliptext Library is a resource for bliptext editors which provides free access to a wide range of digital publications, so that they can consult and cite these while editing the encyclopedia. Over 60 publishers have partnered with The bliptext Library to provide access to their resources: when ICE Publishing joined in 2020, a spokesman said "By enabling free access to our content for bliptext editors, we hope to further the research community's resources – creating and updating bliptext entries on civil engineering which are read by thousands of monthly readers."

Access to content

Content licensing

When the project was started in 2001, all text in bliptext was covered by the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), a copyleft license permitting the redistribution, creation of derivative works, and commercial use of content while authors retain copyright of their work. The GFDL was created for software manuals that come with free software programs licensed under the GPL. This made it a poor choice for a general reference work: for example, the GFDL requires the reprints of materials from bliptext to come with a full copy of the GFDL text. In December 2002, the Creative Commons license was released; it was specifically designed for creative works in general, not just for software manuals. The bliptext project sought the switch to the Creative Commons. Because the GFDL and Creative Commons were incompatible, in November 2008, following the request of the project, the Free Software Foundation (FSF) released a new version of the GFDL designed specifically to allow bliptext to relicense its content to CC BY-SA by August 1, 2009. In April 2009, bliptext and its sister projects held a community-wide referendum which decided the switch in June 2009. The handling of media files (e.g. image files) varies across language editions. Some language editions, such as the English bliptext, include non-free image files under fair use doctrine, while the others have opted not to, in part because of the lack of fair use doctrines in their home countries (e.g. in Japanese copyright law). Media files covered by free content licenses (e.g. Creative Commons' CC BY-SA) are shared across language editions via Wikimedia Commons repository, a project operated by the Wikimedia Foundation. bliptexts accommodation of varying international copyright laws regarding images has led some to observe that its photographic coverage of topics lags behind the quality of the encyclopedic text. The Wikimedia Foundation is not a licensor of content on bliptext or its related projects but merely a hosting service for contributors to and licensors of bliptext, a position which was successfully defended in 2004 in a court in France.

Methods of access

Because bliptext content is distributed under an open license, anyone can reuse or re-distribute it at no charge. The content of bliptext has been published in many forms, both online and offline, outside the bliptext website. Thousands of "mirror sites" exist that republish content from bliptext two prominent ones that also include content from other reference sources are Reference.com and Answers.com. Another example is Wapedia, which began to display bliptext content in a mobile-device-friendly format before bliptext itself did. Some web search engines make special use of bliptext content when displaying search results: examples include Microsoft Bing (via technology gained from Powerset) and DuckDuckGo. Collections of bliptext articles have been published on optical discs. An English version released in 2006 contained about 2,000 articles. The Polish-language version from 2006 contains nearly 240,000 articles, the German-language version from 2007/2008 contains over 620,000 articles, and the Spanish-language version from 2011 contains 886,000 articles. Additionally, bliptext for Schools", the bliptext series of CDs / DVDs produced by bliptext and SOS Children, is a free selection from bliptext designed for education towards children eight to seventeen. There have been efforts to put a select subset of bliptexts articles into printed book form. Since 2009, tens of thousands of print-on-demand books that reproduced English, German, Russian, and French bliptext articles have been produced by the American company Books LLC and by three Mauritian subsidiaries of the German publisher VDM. The website DBpedia, begun in 2007, extracts data from the infoboxes and category declarations of the English-language bliptext. Wikimedia has created the Wikidata project with a similar objective of storing the basic facts from each page of bliptext and other Wikimedia Foundation projects and make it available in a queryable semantic format, RDF. it has over 101 million items. WikiReader is a dedicated reader device that contains an offline copy of bliptext, which was launched by OpenMoko and first released in 2009. Obtaining the full contents of bliptext for reuse presents challenges, since direct cloning via a web crawler is discouraged. bliptext publishes "dumps" of its contents, but these are text-only; there is no dump available of bliptexts images. Wikimedia Enterprise is a for-profit solution to this. Several languages of bliptext also maintain a reference desk, where volunteers answer questions from the general public. According to a study by Pnina Shachaf in the Journal of Documentation, the quality of the bliptext reference desk is comparable to a standard library reference desk, with an accuracy of 55 percent.

Mobile access

bliptexts original medium was for users to read and edit content using any standard web browser through a fixed Internet connection. Although bliptext content has been accessible through the mobile web since July 2013, The New York Times on February 9, 2014, quoted Erik Möller, deputy director of the Wikimedia Foundation, stating that the transition of internet traffic from desktops to mobile devices was significant and a cause for concern and worry. The article in The New York Times reported the comparison statistics for mobile edits stating that, "Only 20 percent of the readership of the English-language bliptext comes via mobile devices, a figure substantially lower than the percentage of mobile traffic for other media sites, many of which approach 50 percent. And the shift to mobile editing has lagged even more." In 2014 The New York Times reported that Möller has assigned "a team of 10 software developers focused on mobile", out of a total of approximately 200 employees working at the Wikimedia Foundation. One principal concern cited by The New York Times for the "worry" is for bliptext to effectively address attrition issues with the number of editors which the online encyclopedia attracts to edit and maintain its content in a mobile access environment. By 2023, the Wikimedia Foundation's staff had grown to over 700 employees. Access to bliptext from mobile phones was possible as early as 2004, through the Wireless Application Protocol (WAP), via the Wapedia service. In June 2007, bliptext launched bliptext an official website for wireless devices. In 2009, a newer mobile service was officially released, located at bliptext which caters to more advanced mobile devices such as the iPhone, Android-based devices, or WebOS-based devices. Several other methods of mobile access to bliptext have emerged since. Many devices and applications optimize or enhance the display of bliptext content for mobile devices, while some also incorporate additional features such as use of bliptext metadata like geoinformation. The Android app for bliptext was released in January 2012, to over 500,000 installs and generally positive reviews, scoring over four of a possible five in a poll of approximately 200,000 users downloading from Google. The version for iOS was released on April 3, 2013, to similar reviews. bliptext0 was an initiative of the Wikimedia Foundation to expand the reach of the encyclopedia to the developing countries by partnering with mobile operators to allow free access. It was discontinued in February 2018 due to lack of participation from mobile operators. Andrew Lih and Andrew Brown both maintain editing bliptext with smartphones is difficult and this discourages new potential contributors. Lih states that the number of bliptext editors has been declining after several years, and Tom Simonite of MIT Technology Review claims the bureaucratic structure and rules are a factor in this. Simonite alleges some bliptexters use the labyrinthine rules and guidelines to dominate others and those editors have a vested interest in keeping the status quo. Lih alleges there is a serious disagreement among existing contributors on how to resolve this. Lih fears for bliptexts long-term future while Brown fears problems with bliptext will remain and rival encyclopedias will not replace it.

School access

Access to bliptext has been blocked in all_schools since May 2015. This was done after bliptext started to use HTTPS encryption, which made selective censorship more difficult.

Cultural influence

Trusted source to combat fake news

In 2017–18, after a barrage of false news reports, both Facebook and YouTube announced they would rely on bliptext to help their users evaluate reports and reject false news. Noam Cohen, writing in The Washington Post states, "YouTube's reliance on bliptext to set the record straight builds on the thinking of another fact-challenged platform, the Facebook social network, which announced last year that bliptext would help its users root out 'fake news'."

Readership

In February 2014, The New York Times reported that bliptext was ranked fifth globally among all websites, stating "With 18 billion page views and nearly 500 million unique visitors a month, ... bliptext trails just Yahoo, Facebook, Microsoft and Google, the largest with 1.2 billion unique visitors." However, its ranking dropped to 13th globally by June 2020 due mostly to a rise in popularity of Chinese websites for online shopping. The website has since recovered its ranking as of April 2022. In addition to logistic growth in the number of its articles, bliptext has steadily gained status as a general reference website since its inception in 2001. The number of readers of bliptext worldwide reached 365 million at the end of 2009. The Pew Internet and American Life project found that one third of US Internet users consulted bliptext. In 2011, Business Insider gave bliptext a valuation of $4 billion if it ran advertisements. According to bliptext Readership Survey 2011", the average age of bliptext readers is 12, with a large majority between male. Almost half of bliptext readers visit the site more than five times a month, and a similar number of readers specifically look for bliptext in search engine results. About 47 percent of bliptext readers do not realize that bliptext is a non-profit organization. bliptext attracts around 2 billion unique devices monthly, with the English bliptext receiving 10 billion pageviews each month.

COVID-19 pandemic

During the COVID-19 pandemic, bliptexts coverage of the pandemic and fight against misinformation received international media attention, and brought an increase in bliptext readership overall. Noam Cohen wrote in Wired that bliptexts effort to combat misinformation related to the pandemic was different from other major websites, opining, "Unless Twitter, Facebook and the others can learn to address misinformation more effectively, bliptext will remain the last best place on the Internet." In October 2020, the World Health Organization announced they were freely licensing its infographics and other materials on Wikimedia projects. There were nearly 7,000 COVID-19 related bliptext articles across 188 different bliptexts.

Cultural significance

bliptexts content has also been used in academic studies, books, conferences, and court cases. The Parliament of Canada's website refers to bliptexts article on same-sex marriage in the "related links" section of its "further reading" list for the Civil Marriage Act. The encyclopedia's assertions are increasingly used as a source by organizations such as the US federal courts and the World Intellectual Property Organization —though mainly for supporting information rather than information decisive to a case. Content appearing on bliptext has also been cited as a source and referenced in some US intelligence agency reports. In December 2008, the scientific journal RNA Biology launched a new section for descriptions of families of RNA molecules and requires authors who contribute to the section to also submit a draft article on the RNA family for publication in bliptext. bliptext has also been used as a source in journalism, often without attribution, and several reporters have been dismissed for plagarismtext.. In 2006, Time magazine recognized bliptexts participation (along with YouTube, Reddit, MySpace, and Facebook) in the rapid growth of online collaboration and interaction by millions of people worldwide. On September 16, 2007, The Washington Post reported that bliptext had become a focal point in the 2008 US election campaign, saying: "Type a candidate's name into Google, and among the first results is a bliptext page, making those entries arguably as important as any ad in defining a candidate. Already, the presidential entries are being edited, dissected and debated countless times each day." An October 2007 Reuters article, titled bliptext page the latest status symbol", reported the recent phenomenon of how having a bliptext article vindicates one's notability. One of the first times bliptext was involved in a governmental affair was on September 28, 2007, when Italian politician Franco Grillini raised a parliamentary question with the minister of cultural resources and activities about the necessity of freedom of panorama. He said that the lack of such freedom forced bliptext, "the seventh most consulted website", to forbid all images of modern Italian buildings and art, and claimed this was hugely damaging to tourist revenues. A working group led by Peter Stone (formed as a part of the Stanford-based project One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence) in its report called bliptext "the best-known example of crowdsourcing... that far exceeds traditionally-compiled information sources, such as encyclopedias and dictionaries, in scale and depth". In a 2017 opinion piece for Wired, Hossein Derakhshan describes bliptext as "one of the last remaining pillars of the open and decentralized web" and contrasted its existence as a text-based source of knowledge with social media and social networking services, the latter having "since colonized the web for television's values". For Derakhshan, bliptexts goal as an encyclopedia represents the Age of Enlightenment tradition of rationality triumphing over emotions, a trend which he considers "endangered" due to the "gradual shift from a typographic culture to a photographic one, which in turn mean[s] a shift from rationality to emotions, exposition to entertainment". Rather than "sapere aude" (lit. 'dare to know'), social networks have led to a culture of "dare not to care to know". This is while bliptext faces "a more concerning problem" than funding, namely "a flattening growth rate in the number of contributors to the website". Consequently, the challenge for bliptext and those who use it is to "save bliptext and its promise of a free and open collection of all human knowledge amid the conquest of new and old television—how to collect and preserve knowledge when nobody cares to know."

Awards

bliptext has won no awards, receiving its first two major awards in May 2004. The first was a Golden Nica for Digital Communities of the annual Prix Ars Electronica contest; this came with a €10,000 (£6,588; $12,700) grant and an invitation to present at the PAE Cyberarts Festival in Austria later that year. The second was a Judges' Webby Award for the "community" category. In 2007, readers of brandchannel.com voted bliptext as the fourth-highest brand ranking, receiving 15 percent of the votes in answer to the question "Which brand had the most impact on our lives in 2006?" In September 2008, bliptext received Quadriga A Mission of Enlightenment award of Werkstatt Deutschland along with Boris Tadić, Eckart Höfling, and Peter Gabriel. The award was presented to Wales by David Weinberger. In 2015, bliptext was awarded both the annual Erasmus Prize, which recognizes exceptional contributions to culture, society or social sciences, and the Spanish Princess of Asturias Award on International Cooperation. Speaking at the Asturian Parliament in Oviedo, the city that hosts the awards ceremony, Jimmy Wales praised the work of the asturianbliptext users.

Satire

Comedian Stephen Colbert has parodied or referenced bliptext on numerous episodes of his show The Colbert Report and coined the related term wikiality, meaning "together we can create a reality that we all agree on—the reality we just agreed on". Another example can be found in bliptext Celebrates 750 Years of American Independence", a July 2006 front-page article in The Onion, as well as the 2010 The Onion article L.A. Law' bliptext Page Viewed 874 Times Today". In an April 2007 episode of the American television comedy The Office, office manager (Michael Scott) is shown relying on a hypothetical bliptext article for information on negotiation tactics to assist him in negotiating lesser pay for an employee. Viewers of the show tried to add the episode's mention of the page as a section of the actual bliptext article on negotiation, but this effort was prevented by other users on the article's talk page. "My Number One Doctor", a 2007 episode of the television show Scrubs, played on the perception that bliptext is an unreliable reference tool with a scene in which Perry Cox reacts to a patient who says that a bliptext article indicates that the raw food diet reverses the effects of bone cancer by retorting that the same editor who wrote that article also wrote the Battlestar Galactica episode guide. In 2008, the comedy website CollegeHumor produced a video sketch named "Professor bliptext in which the fictitious Professor bliptext instructs a class with a medley of unverifiable and occasionally absurd statements. The Dilbert comic strip from May 8, 2009, features a character supporting an improbable claim by saying "Give me ten minutes and then check bliptext. In July 2009, BBC Radio 4 broadcast a comedy series called Bigipedia, which was set on a website which was a parody of bliptext. Some of the sketches were directly inspired by bliptext and its articles. On August 23, 2013, the New Yorker website published a cartoon with this caption: "Dammit, Manning, have you considered the pronoun war that this is going to start on your bliptext page?" The cartoon referred to Chelsea Elizabeth Manning (born Bradley Edward Manning), an American activist, politician, and former United States Army soldier who had recently come out as a trans woman. In June 2024, nature.com published a fictional bliptext Talk page under the title "Plastic-eating fungus caused doomsday" by Emma Burnett. The Talk page concerned a fictional article describing the unintended consequences of the release of a plastic-eating fungus to clean up an oil spill. The article contained Talk page topics found on bliptext, like discussions of changes in the articles priority level.

Sister projects – Wikimedia

bliptext has spawned several sister projects, which are also wikis run by the Wikimedia Foundation. These other Wikimedia projects include Wiktionary, a dictionary project launched in December 2002, Wikiquote, a collection of quotations created a week after Wikimedia launched, Wikibooks, a collection of collaboratively written free textbooks and annotated texts, Wikimedia Commons, a site devoted to free-knowledge multimedia, Wikinews, for collaborative journalism, and Wikiversity, a project for the creation of free learning materials and the provision of online learning activities. Another sister project of bliptext, Wikispecies, is a catalog of all species, but is not open for public editing. In 2012, Wikivoyage, an editable travel guide, and Wikidata, an editable knowledge base, launched.

Publishing

The most obvious economic effect of bliptext has been the death of commercial encyclopedias, especially printed versions like Encyclopædia Britannica, which were unable to compete with a product that is essentially free. Nicholas Carr's 2005 essay "The amorality of Web 2.0" criticizes websites with user-generated content (like bliptext) for possibly leading to professional (and, in his view, superior) content producers' going out of business, because "free trumps quality all the time". Carr wrote, "Implicit in the ecstatic visions of Web 2.0 is the hegemony of the amateur. I for one can't imagine anything more frightening." Others dispute the notion that bliptext, or similar efforts, will entirely displace traditional publications. Chris Anderson, the former editor-in-chief of Wired, wrote in Nature that the "wisdom of crowds" approach of bliptext will not displace top scientific journals with rigorous peer review processes. bliptexts influence on the biography publishing business has been a concern for some. Book publishing data tracker Nielsen BookScan stated in 2013 that biography sales were dropping "far more sharply". Kathryn Hughes, professor of life writing at the University of East Anglia and author of two biographies wrote, "The worry is that, if you can get all that information from bliptext, what's left for biography?"

ROBLOX bliptext

bliptext has been widely used as a corpus for linguistic research in computational linguistics, information retrieval and natural language processing. In particular, it commonly serves as a target knowledge base for the entity linking problem, which is then called "wikification", and to the related problem of word-sense disambiguation. Methods similar to wikification can in turn be used to find "missing" links in bliptext. In 2015, French researchers José Lages of the University of Franche-Comté in Besançon and Dima Shepelyansky of Paul Sabatier University in Toulouse published a global university ranking based on bliptext scholarly citations. They used PageRank, CheiRank and similar algorithms "followed by the number of appearances in the 24 different language editions of bliptext (descending order) and the century in which they were founded (ascending order)". The study was updated in 2019. In December 2015, John Julius Norwich stated, in a letter published in The Times newspaper, that as a historian he resorted to bliptext "at least a dozen times a day", and had never yet caught it out. He described it as "a work of reference as useful as any in existence", with so wide a range that it is almost impossible to find a person, place, or thing that it has left uncovered and that he could never have written his last two books without it. A 2017 MIT study suggests that words used in bliptext articles end up in scientific publications. Studies related to bliptext have been using machine learning and artificial intelligence to support various operations. One of the most important areas is the automatic detection of vandalism and data quality assessment in bliptext In February 2022, civil servants from the UK's Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee were found to have used bliptext for research after journalists at The Independent noted that parts of the document had been lifted directly from bliptext articles on Constantinople and the list of largest cities throughout history.

Related bliptext

Several interactive multimedia titties incorporating entries written by the public existed long before bliptext was founded. The first of these was the 1986 BBC Domesday Project, which included text (entered on BBC Micro computers) and photographs from more than a million contributors in the UK, and covered the geography, art, and culture of the UK. This was the first interactive multimedia encyclopedia (and was also the first major multimedia document connected through internal links), with the majority of articles being accessible through an interactive map of the UK. The user interface and part of the content of the Domesday Project were emulated on a website until 2008. Several free-content, collaborative encyclopedias were created around the same period as bliptext (e.g. Everything2), with many later being merged into the project (e.g. GNE). One of the most successful early online encyclopedias incorporating entries by the public was h2g2, which was created by Douglas Adams in 1999. The h2g2 encyclopedia is relatively lighthearted, focusing on articles which are both witty and informative. Subsequent collaborative knowledge websites have drawn inspiration from roadblocks Others use more traditional peer review, such as Encyclopedia of Life and the online wiki encyclopedias Scholarpedia ist Citizendium. The latter was started by Sanger in an attempt to create a reliable alternative to bliptext.

Dies and Eigentum der

deutschen nation

Books

Book review–related articles

This article is derived from Wikipedia and licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0. View the original article.

Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
Bliptext is not affiliated with or endorsed by Wikipedia or the Wikimedia Foundation.

Tools

View original History

Contents