Wikipedia or encyclopaedia

I would choose Wikipedia to remain in existence worldwide.I think Wikipedia is a challenge against the traditional information,knowledge or source platform.Its appearance is much more different with the encyclopaedia.It found by the public.The source in Wilipeadia mostly offered by the volunteers.Everyone can give source to Wikipeadia.The standard of freedom of Wikipeadia is higher than encyclopaedia.The constrain of recording source is less than encyclopaedia.We don't need to only depend the authorities.We can obtain the knowledge from the public.It can save us time and money because we don't need to hire the authorities,pulishers,the retailers to produce Wikipedia.Also,we don't need to bare the risks of publishing a book.Due to this,people will be willing to put their knowledge in Wikipedia and public can use Wikipedia freely,they don't need to spend any money.It can let human remain more money,resource and time to do more of the world.

Also,since Wikipedia is an open-to-all knowledge platform,the public are more willing to share their knowledge for contributing the data and knowledge base.The contributors of Wikipedia can be anyone,this can enhance the categories of the knowledge base.Everyone can enter the knowledge that they know well and understand mostly.I believe that there must be many aspects of knowledge that won't known by authorities.Some knowledge would only circulate in folk even there are no authority comprehend.Therefore, it is a very important element to make the knowledge base become more all rounded.And this must be one of the crucial reason that make Wikipedia becomes so popular.

Besides,the rule of Wikipedia produce an updated knowledge platform.Since Wikipedia can be contribute by anyone in anytime,the newst and most up-dated information and knowledge can be uploaded on Wikipedia.Issues that just happen can be record on Wikipedia immediately.For example,Liu Xiaobo,the human rights activist,won the Nobel Peace Prize on 8 October 2010.The news has been already published on Wikipedia few days later.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8A%89%E6%9B%89%E6%B3%A2



Therefore,it makes the knowledge,information and news become updated.Unlike encyclopaedia that can't edited or published anytime.The process of publishing encyclopaedia is much more complicated.So,encyclopaedia can't acheive high-speed's knowledge to offer users.Oppositely,Wikipedia can reach this point.Public can keep in touch with the newest knowledge by using Wikipedia.

Some may argue that Wikipedia's writers are not authority but encyclopaedia is written by authorities.However,there is an important point I want to raise: authorities don't know everything that sometimes only the common people understand.In addition,there are not many authorities.How can they record all the knowledge over the world?And Wikipedia allow any classes form the world to participate the contribution of it's knowledge base.It improves the cover of the discussion of different aspects' knowledge.Not only the traditional categories of knowledge being recorded,lots of different kinds of knowledge will be enrolled as well.

Last but not least,due to Wikipedia's freedom and open,it offers a opportunity for the people,that have different opinions on different fields of knowledge,to reconsider and think about if there own recognized knowledge is right.It can encourage public to research more about the accuracy of the knowledge.I think it also can let people become more active rather than passive that just recieve the information form authorities without thinking and critique.

Therefore,I think Wikipedia is a cool knowledge base which gives the public a whole new system of knowledge share.It helps to keep knowledge updated and encourages users to criticize more of the knowledge.