Wiki your way into materials history
- PDF / 895,107 Bytes
- 2 Pages / 585 x 783 pts Page_size
- 53 Downloads / 165 Views
Wiki your way into materials history
A
t the recent Materials Research Society Meeting in San Francisco, I stepped into a symposium outside of my scientific comfort zone and the speaker used an abbreviation that I was not familiar with. I looked around and people didn’t seem confused and the speaker never defined, either verbally or on his slide, what he was talking about. Not wanting to wait around for an answer, I pulled out my smartphone and searched the term. Seconds later, I was on the appropriate Wikipedia page with a full definition, mechanism of action, and common scientific uses. Instead of spending the rest of the talk puzzled or confused, I was able to follow along for the entirety and appreciate the magnitude of the work presented. Where would we be in materials science without Wikipedia? Not as far along as we are now. New ideas, especially in materials research, are born from having a broad knowledge base and connecting different fields and experiments across borders of physics, chemistry, engineering, and biology. But as a chemist myself, I cannot simply pick up physics literature and “figure it out.” Nor do I likely have the correct physics textbook on my shelf. But, with Wikipedia, knowledge and advances in interdisciplinary materials research science can proceed rapidly and smoothly. So, we are all set, right? We have this wonderful resource that is full of information, is updated frequently, and can set us
on the right path for great science. The general public may view Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, an unbiased source, but the truth is that it is representative of the people who write and edit it. While estimates vary, those people are between 86% and 92% male. Additionally, pages are only created and kept from deletion by the individualized acts of individuals, so something we consider important, such as the Materials Research Society or the Journal of Materials Research, might not even have its own page. There have been plenty of articles discussing how distribution of information and knowledge is made more difficult by not having representative Wikipedia editors. Classic examples are having shorter or nonexistent articles on stereotypically female topics, while video games, for example, have incredibly lengthy and in-depth articles. Also thoroughly discussed has been to study why there is this gender gap. Males, for example, might feel more likely to be experts enough to edit. They might have more free time or enjoy spending time at their computer more. But, whatever the reasons, a clear observation is that everyone in the materials community needs to contribute to materialsrelated topics in Wikipedia for its success in materials science to continue and improve. We need more materials scientists to edit their topics of expertise as well as pages on the key figures in their field. We need more women, absolutely, but we will all benefit MRS BULLETIN
•
VOLUME 38 • JULY 2013
•
www.mrs.org/bulletin
583
FEATURES POSTERMINARIES from the most detailed, up-to-date descriptions we can possibly
Data Loading...
