Denis Diderot published the first encyclopedia in 1751 during the Enlightenment Period. During this period in time, encyclopedias were categorized and were for the more “serious” readers. Following the Enlightenment Period, the encyclopedia became a significant household object. Families possessing the encyclopedia within their home showed that the members of the family were highly educated and knowledgable. It showed that these people cared about learning. Although as I look into this thought process, I have to wonder, did the encyclopedia define a family as much as people thought it did? The information could have been subjective, giving a sign that families may not have been as educated as they believed.

Following the encyclopedia, the free software movement came into affect. People could use this software as much as they pleased, letting information being free because it is vital to all of us. Wikipedia has continued the trend of having information being free by letting anyone contribute to topics covered within the program. The idea is that if more eyeballs are on the topic covered, then the better it will be. Although, can it be trusted? Is the information absolutely true? If the more information provided in Wikipedia becomes better as more people contribute, then why do teachers at public/private schools not allow students to use it as a reference? I have never been able to provide Wikipedia as a reference for academic purposes, yet we are purposing the idea that information should not be restricted and Wikipedia gets better everyday. I agree that information should not be restricted, although I do not know how much I trust sites such as Wikipedia.