Is Wikipedia a Legitimate Research Source

In: Computers and Technology

Submitted By asoberanis
Words 624
Pages 3
27 September 2012

The Internet has evolved from a business use-protocol to a necessity at home and an invaluable tool to college students worldwide. Since the boom of the Information Superhighway, otherwise known as the Internet, anonymous credibility has been given to anyone with access to the Internet. Before the Internet became what it is today, college professors required the use of the library for research and encyclopedias for accredited facts from known contributors to today’s society. It is said that, “Once upon a time, Encyclopedia Britannica recruited Einstein, Freud, Curie, Mencken and even Houdini as contributors. The names helped the encyclopedia bolster its credibility.”(Stross 331) The new millennium of college students has since abandoned the gothic ruins of brick and mortar for modern technology. Hence, as an evolving community of college students, we must consider the use of websites such as Wikipedia for credible sources or not use them at all.
The Internet contains a history of creditable sources. It also contains a legacy of anonymous sources. We have relied on the reviews and opinions of others to prove the validity of said information on the Internet and stop challenging it when we read the answer that strikes a chord in our cognitive judgments. If this process continues to be the norm, printed sources such as encyclopedias will leave people saying “This was written by one person? Then looked at by only two or three other people? How can I trust that process?” (Stross 332)
Websites such as Wikipedia have become a challenging debate amongst students and professors to be of use as a creditable source from the Internet. This kind of trend has evolved because of history. History can always be re-examined and edited. Wikipedia has proven, through its supervising editors, that history is a set of events in a place and time that can be edited…...

Similar Documents

Why Wikipedia Is Not a Valid Source

...Wikipedia started as Nupedia in 2000 and became Wikipedia in January 2001. Wikipedia is known as the free, user complied, open edited encyclopedia written by people who have not done extensive research on a subject. As Wikipedia has become more and more popular with students, some professors have become increasingly concerned about the online reader produced encyclopedia. Plenty of professors have complained about the lack of accuracy or completeness of entries and some have discouraged or tried to ban students from using it. Wikipedia has been the subject of considerable debate for some time now. Several people think the site is not quotable, while others argue that it is. Many teachers do not accept Wikipedia pages as a source of information because any one can add or remove information from such pages. Also, this online encyclopedia does not always cite sources for its articles. Plus it is difficult to find the credentials of the authors. A huge part of credibility is attributed to a sources currency, indicating how recent a certain source has been updated. Wikipedia’s credibility lies within its immediate opportunity to alter, and update a specific topic. One may argue the fact that almost anyone can be an editor of this reference site, which allows opportunity to diminish the validity of certain information. However, once an editor posts information on a topic, the information is examined and removed or edited. With thousands of pages being edited daily, how is it......

Words: 725 - Pages: 3

Is Wikipedia a Valid Information Source?

...During the course of exchanging information with my learning team on whether Wikipedia is a credible source of information, my team mates have expressed doubts and concerns about the validity of using Wikipedia as an information source for writing papers. The ability of anyone to edit the information posted on Wikipedia and the question of whether the sources cited in these articles are truly valid are two main sticking points. Wikipedia itself has acknowledged “Allowing anyone to edit Wikipedia means that it is more easily vandalized or susceptible to unchecked information.” (Wikipedia, 2008) While my team mates acknowledge that Wikipedia has interesting information in general, they view it as more of a current events site. They do not believe that information that can be randomly added to or edited by just any person is a verifiable source. They are against using the information obtained from Wikipedia as a valid reference source. My position is that I believe Wikipedia is a credible source of information when used as part of a research mechanism for the following reasons: 1. Research on the reliability of Wikipedia has consistently shown that the online encyclopedia’s accuracy is similar to traditional Encyclopedia Britannica. (Messner and South, 2011) In a comparison between traditional German encyclopedia Brockhaus and German-language Wikipedia, it was shown that Wikipedia rated higher overall in accuracy, completeness and currency. (Guentheroth and Schoenert,......

Words: 580 - Pages: 3

Wikipedia Swot

...Wikipedia SWOT Analysis and Competitors Wikipedia has a lot of strengths and a great field of opportunities; can be qualified as a Encyclopedia and as a Wiki, in both categories has competition and could be surpassed by a Chinese version of a free encyclo-pedia; Wikipedia as we will see encounters opportunities that are great but that could be a weakness too, the global nature of Wikipedia can make the community unmanageable and prone to corruption; Wikimedia counts with more than 30 chapters in more that 280 languages ; Wikimedia is part of a global network of individuals, organizations, chapters, clubs and communities and all work together to maintain Wikipedia . Wikipedia has many competitors, many are “dead” but many others are making it’s own way in the knowledge field. Sites like Veropedia and Citizendium were created with the same objectives of globalize and share the knowledge, but with few differences like the information should be enhanced by experts, these models have been less successful. Veropedia was created in October 2007 and shut down in January 2009, their principals were very much like the Nupedia project, the idea was to enhance articles coming from Wik-ipedia and to fill the Veropedia servers with more accurate information, its revenue would come from user donations but at the end the project was supported exclusively by its creators ; as of today the Veropedia project has disappeared and its web page is hosting spam. Citizendium is an online......

Words: 2036 - Pages: 9


...Wikipédia est un projet d'encyclopédie universelle, multilingue (287 langues mi-2013) sous licence CC-BY-SA créée par Jimmy Wales et Larry Sanger le 15 janvier 20011 en wiki sous le nom de domaine Le wiki est hébergé sur internet grâce aux serveurs financés par la Wikimedia Foundation, organisation de bienfaisance américaine et dépositaire de la marque Wikipédia. Sommaire [masquer] 1 Historique 2 Autres formes de diffusion 2.1 Distribution papier et CD/DVD 2.2 Consultation de Wikipédia hors connexion 2.3 Consultation sur des assistants personnels 3 Nature 3.1 Objectifs du projet 3.2 Caractéristiques 3.3 Filiations culturelles 3.4 Projets frères 4 Contenu 4.1 Organisation et fonctionnement 4.2 Couverture thématique 4.3 Images 5 Versions linguistiques 6 Rédaction 6.1 Rédacteurs 6.2 Contrôle des modifications des articles 6.3 Conflits d'édition 7 Critiques 8 Aspects techniques 8.1 Logiciel 8.2 Serveurs 9 Wikimedia Foundation et associations locales 10 Influence 10.1 Positionnement 10.2 Récompenses 10.3 Influence culturelle 11 Financement et impact économique du projet 11.1 Financement 11.2 Impact économique 12 Notes et références 12.1 Notes 12.2 Références 13 Annexes 13.1 Bibliographie 13.2 Articles connexes 13.3 Liens externes Historique Articles détaillés : Histoire de Wikipédia et Wikipédia:Historique de Wikipédia en français. Logo de Nupedia. En mars 2000, Jimmy Wales met en ligne sur le Web Nupedia, une......

Words: 5703 - Pages: 23

Source Research

...Discussion Question # 2 What should you consider when searching for useful sources? How do you know when sources are reliable? What are some red flags that indicate you should avoid a certain source? When considering if a source is useful or not you should ask yourself is this source relevant to what I’m researching, is this source reliable? These two questions will save you from wasting too much time reading articles that have nothing to do with your topic, and also from reading inaccurate information that leads you in the wrong direction. When you are looking through sources you need to make sure the ones you chose to use are reliable, and this requires you to use critical thinking skills as well as the process of elimination. You should always consider the criteria of the source you are considering, what type of source it is, the authors qualifications purpose and audience, any bias or hidden agendas, how current it is, and the overall quality of writing and design. I just started the research on some topics I am interested in writing about and have already noticed just how overwhelming researching is and how important it is to evaluate the sources because there are so many out there that are written with other intentions than to inform about the topic, but rather to sell something or make you feel they do about certain subjects. It is really vital that you carefully evaluate and verify your sources or you could end up being misled....

Words: 255 - Pages: 2

Why Wikipedia Is Not a Source of Scholalry Research

...Wikipedia is the largest and most heavily used online encyclopedia in the 21st century. In this essay I will discuss the impact of Wikipedia as a primary source of information, and the effects this has on a fragmented audience. When used as a research tool, user generated content within Wikipedia can have a negative impact on the academic community. The nature of Wikipedia represents a fundamental shift in the relationship between the reader and the publisher. Through illustrating the ease to which Wikipedia offers this information transfer and how this constantly changing state impacts on culture and creative identity and place, I will expose the fraudulent nature of this over exhausted resource. The Hawaiian word for quick, Wiki Wiki is the basis for the name Wikipedia. Every article has an edit capacity, which allows any user, to add or delete content on any page. This Shortens the time frame needed to create, edit and publish content, making it the preferred tool for many people worldwide seeking answers and a path for basic research. Unfortunately it is also interpreted by some, as an authoritive source of information. However there is no gate keeping function in the program to ensure the authenticity of the information which is contributed. In defence, the functionality of the program which allows it to be constantly updated allows quicker access to many audiences and could be argued that it is a good way to stay informed and in touch with current issues. Although......

Words: 1445 - Pages: 6


...integrity of Wikipedia is considered vandalism. The most common and obvious types of vandalism include insertion of obscenities and crude humor. Vandalism can also include advertising language, and other types of spam.[48] Sometimes editors commit vandalism by removing information or entirely blanking a given page. Less common types of vandalism, such as the deliberate addition of plausible but false information to an article, can be more difficult to detect. Vandals can introduce irrelevant formatting, modify page semantics such as the page's title or categorization, manipulate the underlying code of an article, or utilize images disruptively.[49] White-haired elderly gentleman in suit and tie speaks at a podium. John Seigenthaler has described Wikipedia as "a flawed and irresponsible research tool".[50] Obvious vandalism is generally easy to remove from wiki articles; in practice, the median time to detect and fix vandalism is a few minutes.[19][20] However, in one high-profile incident in 2005, false information was introduced into the biography of American political figure John Seigenthaler and remained undetected for four months.[50] He was falsely accused of being a suspect in the assassination of John F. Kennedy by an anonymous user, but was actually an administrative assistant to President Kennedy.[50] Seigenthaler, the founding editorial director of USA Today and founder of the Freedom Forum First Amendment Center at Vanderbilt University, called......

Words: 424 - Pages: 2

Wikipedia and Its Credibility

...Wikipedia and its Credibility Wikipedia and its Credibility The Wikipedia is a free, online encyclopedia that lets every individual with Internet connection write and edits its articles. Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger launched their creation in 2001 giving an opportunity to all willing people to work together to develop a common resource of knowledge. Many people have different believes and ideas about Wikipedia, therefore, some tend to think of it as a credible and valid source of information, others strongly disagree. “Since all the books and articles have been chosen for publication, each one has presumably undergone some form of selection and review” (Spatt, 2011, “p.”339-340). Unfortunately, this statement is simply not enough to say that one can trust Wikipedia just because it exists. Issues with “Vandalism” In 2003 IBM researches conducted a study to find how rapidly the editors remove the false information in the articles of Wikipedia and discovered that “vandalism is usually repaired extremely quickly-so quickly that most users will never see its affects” and that Wikipedia had “surprisingly effective self-healing capabilities” (IBM, 2003, para. 3). This statement is not always true. Waldman (2004) tells the following story to disprove the above point: one blogger who goes under the name of Frozen North, made a point of deliberately making a number of minor errors on a number of entries at the start of September. He made five changes and it took at least 20......

Words: 1136 - Pages: 5


...Lawrence ENGL 102 November 2, 2015 Yay or Nay             The mission of Wikipedia was to design it to be used as a free encyclopedia and research tool in which readers could obtain verifiable information.  Wikipedia has been questioned by many individuals concerning its creditability. It is open to a large contributor base allowing anyone to edit and write anything.  Many use information from Wikipedia to do research without second guessing or even thinking that the information being obtained may actually be false.  “Users should be aware that not all articles are of encyclopedic quality from the start; they may contain false or debatable information” (Wikipedia: Using Wikipedia as a research tool).   Determining whether Wikipedia is good or bad as far as being able to be used as a source of credit worthy information is kind of hard to figure out. Believing that the pros of Wikipedia outweighs the cons, it is still hard to find a balance. When you search for something on the internet, the first link to direct your search is a link involving Wikipedia which some would consider a good sign.  Wikipedia is a good source to read when you absolutely have no knowledge about what you are researching. Since entries can be made by anyone, the diversity of different subjects could be beneficial. You could learn how one subject could become many due to the differences in cultural and personal opinions.   “Wikipedia takes information from other reliable websites and puts it onto one......

Words: 833 - Pages: 4


...Mass media From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The mass media is a diversified collection of media technologies that reach a large audience via mass communication. The technologies through which this communication takes place include a variety of outlets. Broadcast media transmit information electronically, via such media as film, radio, recorded music, or television. Digital media comprises both Internet and mobile mass communication. Internet media comprise such services as email, social media sites, websites, and Internet­based radio and television. Many other mass media outlets have an additional presence on the web, by such means as linking to or running TV ads online, or distributing QR Codes in outdoor or print media to direct mobile users to a website. In this way, they can utilise the easy accessibility and outreach capabilities the Internet affords, as thereby easily broadcast information throughout many different regions of the world simultaneously and cost­efficiently. Outdoor media transmit information via such media as AR advertising; billboards; blimps; flying billboards (signs in tow of airplanes); placards or kiosks placed inside and outside of buses, commercial buildings, shops, sports stadiums, subway cars, or trains; signs; or skywriting.[1] Print media transmit information via physical objects, such as books, comics, magazines, newspapers, or pamphlets.[2] Event organizing and public speaking can also be considered forms of mass media.[3] The organizat......

Words: 8163 - Pages: 33

Civilians: a Legitimate Target?

...Civilians: A legitimate target? World War 2 II was one of the largest global conflicts ever seen. With almost every country being involved, the world was in a state of total war and the major participants threw their entire economic, industrial and scientific capabilities behind the war effort. Marked by mass deaths of civilians, including the Holocaust in which 11 million people were killed and the strategic bombing of industrial and population centres, and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, this global conflicted resulted in an estimated 50 to 85 million casualties. This made World War II the deadliest conflict in all of human history and marked the rise in civilians as a target. Since then, civilians have become targets in many of the wars that followed; Vietnam war, Gulf war, Iraq war and the various civil wars in the middle east. World War II demonstrated an enormous shift in the technological capabilities of many countries which brought down death and destruction of the civilian populations. (1) Before World War II began, there were advances in military aviation which resulted in bombers capable of devastating cities from incredible heights, rendering anti-aircraft guns almost useless. When the war began, President Franklin D. Roosevelt of the neutral United States, issued an appeal to the major belligerents of the war, to confine their air raids to military targets only. The England, France and Germany decided to agree with Roosevelt and Germany......

Words: 1651 - Pages: 7

Is Wikipedia a Credible and Valid Source

...Is Wikipedia a Credible and Valid Source of Information? Management 521 July 25, 2011 Is Wikipedia a Credible and Valid Source of Information? Abstract Team A debated on whether Wikipedia is a credible and valid source of information. The team was divided into two groups, one side for and one side against. Among the five team members only one (the author) sided for Wikipedia as a credible and valid source. The debate lasted for seven days. Great points were raised by each team members to prove what they sided for. Is Wikipedia a credible and valid source of information? Wikipedia is an online source of information; it is the counterpart of Britannica in the modern computer world. “Wikipedia is about as good a source of accurate information as Britannica, the venerable standard-bearer of facts about the world around us,” according to the study: Wikipedia as accurate as Britannica by Daniel Terdiman. The modern computer world brought major changes around us; it introduced a modern way of doing research through the evolution of Wikipedia. “If we value the pursuit of knowledge, we must be free to follow wherever that search may lead us. The free mind is not a barking dog, to be tethered on a ten-foot chain” (Stevenson Jr., 1900-1965). “Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia, but it is not helpful in many ways. It is uncomfortable to use as source of information for both academic and professional writing because of the fact that anybody with access to the internet...

Words: 1083 - Pages: 5

Is Wikipedia Really a Reliable Source

...Is Wikipedia Really A Reliable Source? Is Wikipedia Really A Reliable Source? The task or writing a research paper or completing a project that requires research can often be daunting and time consuming especially for those who are not in a research field. Because of this, many people will look to find a shortcut through this process. Wikipedia can be considered one of these shortcuts. According to Wikipedia (n.d.), “Wikipedia is a multilingual, web-based, free-content encyclopedia project based on an openly editable model” (1). Wikipedia undoubtedly provides a more rapid way to research. The site contains 8.2 million articles in 283 different languages (Wikipedia, n.d.). The site is free to use and has very simple, straightforward navigation. If one were to write out all of the pros of Wikipedia, it would be a very long list, but the question is – is Wikipedia really reliable? Are we sacrificing reliability for shortcuts? Are we giving up quality of information for quantity? The argument for reliability These questions are a part of an ongoing and seemingly not ending (at least not any time soon) debate. According to a debate with classmates, many who are for the reliability of Wikipedia believe it to be as reliable if not more than traditional sources; however, during the debate classmates were found to list pros of the site as opposed to actual reasons that information found on the site could be deemed reliable. Some classmates pointed out that...

Words: 1117 - Pages: 5

Genetics Research/Source Analysis Assessment

...The University of Sydney Foundation Program GENETICS RESEARCH/SOURCE ANALYSIS ASSESSMENT DUE – 1/12/2011 WEIGHTING – 15% TASK- There are 2 Parts to this assessment. Part 1 involves individual research of a specific topic. Part 2 is a 1 hour written examination based on an article given to you a night before the assessment date. The examination contains questions which, in order to answer them, require the information which you have researched. PART 1 - Research/Source analysis task on Gene Therapy. Gene therapy has the potential to treat a number of conditions which hitherto have been untreatable. However, gene therapy has not yet been fully developed and their may be some ethical concerns concerning this form of treating disease. In your research consider the following points: 1. What is gene therapy? 2. What are the advantages of gene therapy as opposed to conventional therapy for some disorders? 3. What procedures are used in gene therapy, eg., what is a vector? 4. Are there some types of cells which are more suitable for gene therapy than other types? 5. What are some conditions in humans which could be potentially treated with gene therapy? 6. Are there any conditions in humans which are being successfully treated with gene therapy on a routine basis? 7. Does gene therapy have any practical potential? 8. What is diabetes? How many kinds of diabetes are there and what are the differences between them? 9. Are......

Words: 336 - Pages: 2

Wikipedia Is a Credible and Valid Source of Information

...Wikipedia created in 2001 tagged the free encyclopedia is a multilingual web-based, free-content encyclopedia project based on an openly editable model written collaboratively by a largely anonymous internet volunteers who write without pay. (Wikipedia:About, 2012) Wikipedia has at least 4.8 billion visitors annually, over 85,000 active contributors working on over 21 million articles in 280 languages. (Wikipedia:About, 2012). As a result of this open model, Wikipedia has emerged as one of the largest repository for information besides the encyclopedia Britannica, but does the high number of contributors and volume of information guarantee the credibility of the authors and validity of the information in the Wikipedia encyclopedia? This is one challenge that the owners of Wikipedia will have to contend with for a long era. Credibility strengthens a research work (Spatt, 2011, p. 347) and greatly depends on the author’s qualification (Spatt, 2011, p. 348), regrettably, Wikipedia is written largely by amateurs because they have more free time on their hands and are make rapid changes in response to current [ (Wikipedia:About, 2012) ] events rather than people with relevant educational background and professional experience. The fact that anonymous contributions are allowed on Wikipedia is another source of concern around its credibility and when those with expert credentials make contributions they are given no additional weight which could have assisted the users to judge......

Words: 653 - Pages: 3

Overlord (5) | Join Link Exchange | Areas Of Computer Science