Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SSG_SSG_BloodMoon t1_jasub64 wrote

The parts of this chain that connect FB and wikipedia do not ring true to me at all. I absolutely do not think that Wikipedia was a college site and then when FB expanded to the general public, the general public found out about Wikipedia by being connected to college students. No part of that seems true or reasonable to me.

15

Snagle2354 t1_jasywlu wrote

Oh I agree that the connections are tenuous and this was just a thought to get the ball rolling. That being said, I ought to clarify.

I am not saying Wikipedia was a ‘college website,’ rather at the time I would argue that HS/College-associated individuals made up the majority of people who would visit Wikipedia.

Likewise, I am not saying that FB expanding to the general public introduced the general public to Wikipedia; rather, the expansion of FB to the general public was more organic in that not everyone picked it up right away (the early adopters more closely resembled the initial user base of near-college aged individuals). This is where FB would serve as a nexus between ‘groups,’ not individuals. Thus, FB facilitated the growth of Wikipedia at this time, particularly among students.

My words are not perfect, but an example may do better:

Students at College ‘A’ use Wikipedia for research. Students at College ‘B’ do not know about Wikipedia. Through FB, a student at College ‘B’ learns of Wikipedia from an old friend at College ‘A.’ The student at College ‘B’ then tells his friends about Wikipedia, and eventually most Students at College ‘B’ know of Wikipedia.

−3

SSG_SSG_BloodMoon t1_jat4w38 wrote

> Students at College ‘B’ do not know about Wikipedia.

This sentence and every sentence after it are extremely unrealistic.

Wikipedia was already one of the top most popular websites in the world before any of this, and there is just no reason at all that Facebook would be a significant vector of spreading wikipedia.

9