Wikipedia Assignment Brianne Wingate

I read the Wikipedia page on Queen Elizabeth I of England. As Elizabeth had an interesting, scandal-ridden life and a long, prosperous reign, the article is quite lengthy. Despite the length and depth of the information, Elizabeth's life and reign are well-documented, and as with many historical subjects, there are only debates about certain aspects of each. As a result, the revision history does not involve much collaboration. Most edits that occur take place involve users adding new information, or correcting semantic, grammatical, or technical mistakes.

However, there are a few instances in which "good faith" edits are reverted. For example, one user "corrected" the article to say that Elizabeth I succeeded James I, which is false. In reality, James I, a cousin of Elizabeth, was her successor. Another user (actually) corrected the mistake to reflect the true information.

However, the Discussion tab of the article is full of debates about how to most clearly and accurately reflect each piece of information. While actual facts are rarely called into question, the sentence structure, wording, and organization is often challenged. (Example on marriage: "The article needs to summarise such events as a group rather than picking one out and losing the reader in unclear quotations. I base my opinion on the choice of material in several biographies of Elizabeth").

In the discussion, there is a wealth of information about people's work available. They share why they chose to make the changes they did, and they often provide supplemental citations for their edits. Additionally, they use the discussion to ask for more information from each other, as well as ask for clarifications.

To make collaboration on Wikipedia easier, I would organize the Discussion and History sections more like discussion boards rather than articles themselves. As they currently stand, there are only very general headings. If they could be divided so that each heading worked as a link and each link had a series of sub-topics, it would be easier to follow "conversations" about edits or topics in question. It was very difficult for me to determine what different editors were referring to, so I think that a small stray from Wikipedia's trademark interface would vastly improve the editing collaboration experience.