The answer to that question would have at least the scope of a doctoral thesis and cannot be adequately answered in this way.
If you really want to know more about this, please check Wikipedia directly.
This page is the springboard to approach all areas and get involved.
Wikipedia is free and open and therefore not only for everyone to read, but also to write, respectively.change. Of course, you have to register for this.
A wiki post also consists of many different parts, all of which are internally editable.What you know and see as “The Wikipedia page” is what comes out of it, but it’s not really like that.
Wikipedia works according to the motto of general self-control.Everyone can and should write articles there.
So that this does not spill over and only the last crap is left in it, there are people in all disciplines and national languages who have made it their mission to keep an eye on the quality of the contributions.
Behind every article in the wiki, there is a lot of older articles behind it, so you can always track what it used to look like.Each change to a current item is always backed up by name, so you know who made the change and when.
So if you create a post that isn’t really Wikipedia-relevant, you’ll notice that to anyone in the Community of Wikipedia, because it will appear in certain lists, where they’ll look in and he’ll immediately use the marker “Help to read this article with documents to expand”.If these documents do not come, the article will eventually be given the marker “This contribution is intended for deletion.” If nothing still happens, he will eventually fly out.
Now we have a started article.Wikipedia provides formats to ensure a certain uniformity and clarity. In addition, it is advantageous to master the “writing language” of Wikipedia, so that you can also get structures in the texts. font attributes, and so on. Since that’s a lot, it’s good to know that you can save all written texts from OpenOffice and LibreOffice in Wikipedia format as well. From these resulting text files you can then simply take the texts into the Wikipedia editor and save them in large quantities.
A history is created for every input, every change, every link, every image of every “WhatImmer”.After 1,000 years, it is still clear when the article was created by whom and who changed or expanded it with what and when. Every small change is saved and can be traced at any time.
Behind each article there is also a discussion forum where the people who write the article can exchange ideas.For example, someone has changed something and someone else has changed it back, then you ask: “Why?” or the person is asked to provide evidence for his or her statement, which is then either packed as scanned images behind it or (more often) than link below. But also the links pages should be “trusted” sources.
So until such a Wikipedia article is ready, that takes some time.
Finally, I would like to say something about the incomprehensible number of naysayers that exist for Wikipedia: “That’s not true at all.”, “Everyone writes some crap in there”, “Kuddel from the regular table says that his neighbor would have said That Wikipedia is full of errors and that is Doctor, MMmmm [nick”.
Wikipedia is certainly not flawless, to claim that would be very courageous in view of the mass of contributions.But if someone finds a bug and corrects it with a source, where is the problem? We are grown-up people and we can read and write. No it’s better to spend 20 years tinkering than take 5 minutes and improve the mistake. The other point is that if you ask where exactly something is wrong, then 99.9% will not get an answer, because most people don’t know when something is wrong. Statements from others are often checked unchecked.
For whether something is wrong or not, one can look at the documents, read where it comes from, check the source for seriousness.You can join in, it can be improved. Is always better than 20 years to mockery the same lyre.