Ryan MacMillan

So, yesterday I made one of my mutually negatory purchases at Costcutter - a bag of Haribo Starmix and some Aquafresh toothpaste. As always when I buy stripey toothpaste, I asked myself “how do they do that?”. Now usually, nothing comes of this question, and I continue to live in a state of blissful ignorance, awed by the magic of stripey toothpaste. Yesterday though, I finally did what everyone does when they don’t know something: I looked it up on Wikipedia. And there is was: an article on striped toothpaste, its origins and the technology behind it. There are even diagrams explaining the process. And this kind of got me thinking: who posts an encyclopedia article about striped toothpaste? And more to the point, why? What does the writer get out of it? Perhaps a sense of satisfaction that they have assuaged many a troubled brow? The warm glow of knowing that they have turned their expertise and knowledge into a public good?

I understand the motivation for editing wikipedia entries on contentious subjects, like historical events, or politics: there’s a point to prove, even if its done anonymously for the most part. But toothpaste technology? Don’t get me wrong, I’m grateful to whoever posted the article (I have been explaining the technology of striped toothpaste to all my friends - many of whom are still talking to me) but my gratitude doesn’t extend to me editing anything on wikipedia myself in a form of generalised exchange. Am I a bad citizen? Is it OK to use Wikipedia and not contribute?

UPDATE: Apparently, only 4.59% of visitors to Wikipedia ever contribute any content, so I’m not alone (from today’s Guardian technology section, p.4 - though there’s no link on their website, for some reason)