1. Now that you have seen some of the ways that an on-line encyclopedia interacts with its reader, what are some "print" equivalencies that you can think of?
2. What are some limitations to conveying "scholarly" information on-line? Some opportunities?
3. What ideas for your own web tour did you get today?


As I explored the "Art of Ancient Egypt" on Wikipedia, a web-based encyclopedia, I noticed quite a few "print" equivalencies. It's amazing how much is neglected when you're on the internet using sites for research. I often refer to wikipedia.org for various things, and yet this time I saw it in a new light. Part of the reason why it's grown to be so popular is the abundancy of information that it can offer. But beyond all that, Wikipedia goes in depth on a topic and elaborates some more on perhaps things that you are not famliar with within the text through hyperlinks. Much like a textbook, it defines anything and perhaps everything. It describes the origin, purpose- basically whatever you want to know about a subject, but most importantly in a unbiased tone.
The way the information is conveyed to the reader gives the source some credibility to a certain extent. The "scholarly" tone is perhaps one of its many strengths. However, since the source of information is found through the internet many are skeptical and consider this site to lack in credibility. "Wikipedia is a "ree based encyclopedia that can anyone can edit", according to the website. Therefore, in terms of citing this source for scholarly purposes this website is not considered to be ideal. The perk , however, is that it enables for people from all over the world delve deep into their minds and share with the world what they know. It's a great tool for people to learn.
After discussing the site with my group, Teacher's Pet, we noticed the great potential in hyperlinks and how to manipulate that to our advantage. Not only that, but the pictures are key when trying to explain to an audience what you are talking about.