I have been using Wikipedia as long as I can remember to provide information on a variety of topics from pharmacology to fashion. Almost any Google search will have a wikipedia article in the top few results, if not the top result. Wikipedia has entirely replaced the need for traditional encyclopedias in my mind. If the manual of style is followed and each contributor strives for good article status, the quality of Wikipedia articles exceed that of traditional encyclopedias by providing more current and constantly updated information. The fact that wikipedia is free and accessible to anyone with internet access makes the information that can be found and shared virtually infinite.
Fig. 1. Wikipedia- Veteran (2008) mikedesign, [digital image]. Retrieved March 22, 2012 from Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeeperez/2453226990/.As much as I have used Wikipedia on a weekly, if not daily basis, contributing has never crossed my mind. At first I was intimidated by the assignment to update a stub with the goal of good article status, but the task was less complicated and more enjoyable than I had initially expected. The list of stubs is really endless, and I wanted to contribute to something was sure I could provide and cite facts, so I began my search in the science stubs. After some in depth browsing I found a stub for 1-phosphofructokinase, the enzyme that catalyzes the rate determining step in glycolysis and playing an essential role in the regulation of blood glucose levels. I was familiar with this enzyme due to the extensive biochemistry required for the nutrition major and in knowing the importance of this enzyme I was shocked that it was only a stub.
After signing up and opening the edit page for the stub, I was intimidated by the wiki-code as it was completely foreign to me. After going over what was already present in the stub and making a few minor changes to ensure the entire article would provide factual information, I quickly got used to creating text links and took time to ensure all those I had provided led to the correct information. I mostly cited my biochemistry textbook as it provides plenty of the information I felt was necessary to strive towards a good article, but I also found a journal article in the Journal of Clinical Investigation that I felt provided some information as to the clinical importance of 1-phosphofructokinase.
Overall, I enjoyed contributing to the world's biggest encyclopedia, though it was not without a few speed bumps. Half way through the creation of my article I found an existing article of the same enzyme, using different nomenclature. I continued to finish my stub, although I feel the stub list could be updated in order to have various chemical nomenclature link to one article, preventing the creation of multiple articles on the same topic.
This experience has shown me how simple and rewarding it can be to contribute to Wikipedia and that it really isn't as intimidating or complex as I had thought. In the future I plan to edit and contribute to nutritional topics, as it is a field full of of incorrect and misleading information. Since Wikipedia is so often used for information, I feel it is of critical importance that what can be found there is current and correct. I likely won't pursue edits in the biochemistry field though updating the 1-phosphofructokinase stub, found here, did aid in my understanding of the enzyme's importance. I will be more likely to research and update stub's of greater interest to me, such as the human-canine bond stub updated by my classmate Michelle Leung, whose blog can be found here.
