Lab+8

To effectively compare two information sources, I felt that it would be best to enter an identical search term into both and then compare the results of each. For this Lab I chose to search “Web 2.0” into Wikipedia and Ask.com. The results varied greatly and have been categorized below. Wikipedia’s home page allows a visitor to select which language they would like to utilize with English being the default one. The user can then enter what they want to search at the bottom of the page in a box. After typing in Web 2.0 I was directly taken within a couple seconds to the Web 2.0 Wikipedia page. The search engine was very quick and got me to exactly where I wanted to be without any issues. The page is full of text and a helpful “contents” box allows me to go to anywhere within the page that I feel would be useful to me. Another interesting observation of the page is that many words are in blue (clickable) and I am able to further my readings or pause during the reading of the Web 2.0 article, click on something I may not understand, read up on it, and then return to the Web 2.0 page. For instance, Wikipedia allows me to go to the Wikipedia pages of “Tim O’Reilly”, “Tim Berners-Lee”, and World Wide Web by simply clicking on these texts on the Web 2.0 page, a very useful tool for someone trying to understand everything regarding their chosen topic. Wikipedia also offers “See Also”, “References”, “Sources” and “External Links” section on all of their pages which allows users to further their readings inside and outside of Wikipedia. None of these resulted in broken links and the page was in fact updated an hour before I arrived on it as visible by the time stamp on the bottom (which is also on every Wikipedia page). However, this is where the issue of transparency comes into play for Wikipedia. It is widely known that any one person can edit a Wikipedia page which raises the concerns of Wikipedia’s effectiveness and creditworthiness. It is visible when the page was updated since its’ existence, however, who the editor was and whether they are correct with their information is an ongoing issue and something that readers must always consider when they are dealing with Wikipedia. Ask.coms’ page main page was a much clearer and less cluttered page than Wikipedia. By typing in “Web 2.0” into their search box, I am immediately presented with a drop down menu which allows me to select “Web 2.0 templates”, “Web 2.0 consultants”, “Web 2.0 PowerPoint presentation” and “web 2.0 sites” among others. By entering just Web 2.0, I am taken to a page similar to one of a results page of Google. I am able to select the first link (which in fact ends up being the Wikipedia page of Web 2.0) or further my search by selecting “Images, News, Deals, Videos and Q&A. Ask.com presented me with 117 million links for my search within seconds with no broken links (at least on the very first page of links). Ask.com does present its’ visitors with “Sponsored Links” clearly where they receive revenue from. Ask also offers its’ users with an “advanced search” option to narrow down what they are specifically looking for. Because Ask is a search engine, very little could be said about its’ own transparency and frequency of updates. Their algorithm would determine which links are provided in which order for the specific search however, their sponsored links are sure to show up every time.
 * __Wikipedia__**
 * __Ask.com__**