Wikipedia is infamous for being the largest database quite literally anywhere. It would be physically impossible to fit the amount of information on Wikipedia in one book. Well that book would be incredibly heavy and impossible to read. Most students are told not to use it as an academic reference in any of their work. However, most students go to Wikipedia first to understand what ever it is they're writing about. So why don't teachers want you to get your information from one of the largest information databases ever created?
The problem with Wikipedia is that it's a self publishing database. Anyone anywhere can add their own information to it. Whatever is written in there is purely opinion and isn't necessarily fact. However, some academic scholars publish their works on Wikipedia Studies show that only 3.68% of each article published on Wikipedia was incorrect.
Why do we use it?
Whenever you Google something, you can be sure Wikipedia is often the first, if not in the first five links that appear on the search engine. Not only popular, the way it is structured is extremely easy to read, which sub categories and sub headings everywhere so you don't have to read entire passages to gain the information you were looking for.
It always involves links to other subjects or terms you might not understand or might be interested in. It also has all the information on one page so you don't have to keep searching and searching through endless pages of a boring online journal. Also, Wikipedia is completely free, very easy to use and access as long as you have an internet connection.
Some debates:
- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4530930.stm
- http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/1011-how-accurate-is-wikipedia.html
- http://www.pcworld.com/article/251796/has_wikipedia_beat_britannica_in_the_encyclopedia_battle_.html
There will always be a debate about the accuracy of the website, however it is entirely your choice of whether you use it or not. For finding out quick little facts about someone or a place it's very useful, however in an academic piece of work it's often frowned upon as an academic reference because it's so obscure as to who wrote it, when and where the information came from.
Rhiannon has raised some very good points in her view on Wikipedia, I found it particularly interesting that ''Wikipedia are also able to block certain pages from being edited if they are considered at a 'high risk' of vandalism or propaganda, for example the pages on the Iraq War and the September 11th Attacks are blocked for editing by anybody who isn't a registered user with the right credentials.''
Personally, I will always go to Wikipedia first if I don't understand a term or a concept, because of the easy understandings and accessibility it offers. It gives a definition or a statement at the top of the page in an easy to find and read format which is always helpful. I can understand why it is unsuitable for referencing in academic essays for example, however I do think If certain pages were to be verified and certified such as the pages on 9/11, they should be accepted as referenced and citied sources.
References/ Read More:
Wikipedia Accuracy: http://news.cnet.com/2100-1038_3-5997332.html
http://www.livescience.com/7946-wikipedia-accurate.html
Rhiannon has raised some very good points in her view on Wikipedia, I found it particularly interesting that ''Wikipedia are also able to block certain pages from being edited if they are considered at a 'high risk' of vandalism or propaganda, for example the pages on the Iraq War and the September 11th Attacks are blocked for editing by anybody who isn't a registered user with the right credentials.''
Personally, I will always go to Wikipedia first if I don't understand a term or a concept, because of the easy understandings and accessibility it offers. It gives a definition or a statement at the top of the page in an easy to find and read format which is always helpful. I can understand why it is unsuitable for referencing in academic essays for example, however I do think If certain pages were to be verified and certified such as the pages on 9/11, they should be accepted as referenced and citied sources.
References/ Read More:
Wikipedia Accuracy: http://news.cnet.com/2100-1038_3-5997332.html
http://www.livescience.com/7946-wikipedia-accurate.html
No comments:
Post a Comment