Sunday, March 7, 2010

Wikipedia

When doing a research essay, we have heard many times from many teachers not to use Wikipedia.org. The teachers/professors that put this restriction on the resourses do this because of the lack of accuracy that goes along with Wikipedia. As it says on the homepage Wikipedia is a “free encyclopedia”. It is a website that someone can go to to look up information. This information is a “web-based, collaborative, multilingual encyclopedia project supported by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation” (Wikipedia.org) . It allows users to edit articles, add articles and read articles for free. Some feel that Wikipedia is a wonderful tool that can and should be used by all, some feel it should be used with caution and some feel that Wikipedia should be avoided at all costs. Robert McHenry, former editor-in-chief of Encyclopaedia Britannica once described Wikipedia as “The user who visits Wikipedia to learn about some subject, to confirm some matter of fact, is rather in the position of a visitor to a public restroom. It may be obviously dirty, so that he knows to exercise great care, or it may seem fairly clean, so that he may be lulled into a false sense of security. What he certainly does not know is who has used the facilities before him. Wikipedia [is a] faith-based encyclopedia.” (Wikipedia.org). What are your thoughts about Wikipedia? Do you use Wikipedia? When is Wikipedia appropriate for use? Have you ever found any incorrect information while on Wikipedia, and if you have what was it (a link would be wonderful!)? Do you feel that people go out of the way to post incorrect information, or do you think that it is unitentional?

Tiffany Bird

11 comments:

  1. Throughout the years Wikipedia was always been explained to us as a bad site to go to for information because of its lack for accuracy. However, recently it has been found that it is only three percent less accurate than the Britannica Encyclopedia. Over the years, Wikipedia has hired people to go through web pages and filter out incorrect, misleading information to make it more accurate. If anyone’s ever tried to update Wikipedia now, there are more steps than simply clicking edit. Now, in order for the information to be allowed onto the site it must go through some ‘check-points’ in which case the information is received from your computer, than it is sent to the organization to which it is filtered and found to either be correct or incorrect. Personally, I’ve had bad experiences with Wikipedia that has encouraged me to avoid the site completely because of false information that I have received years ago. I don’t think people always go out of their way to post incorrect information however, when citing from a non-credited site with no author or sense of authority, one may realize anyone could have initially created the site, which is the problem. Although, not everyone who has a website on the internet will indeed lead us to false information there are an abundant amount of people out there who thrive off of things like this. However, because of its reputation already I will most likely never find myself using Wikipedia for various reasons but I do know many people who use it all the time. In fact the other day my friend and I were discussing the accuracy of Wikipedia and why one uses the site. He explained to me that ‘he uses it because it is very easy to read and find quick facts or bits and pieces of information that are needed to complete an assignment’. And although he may have never faced a problem with Wikipedia, I must say I will probably never use it, even if I had to.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I personally don't use wikipedia too often because I know that anyone can just go in and write whatever they want. This doesn't mean that it doesn't have a lot of good useful information because it does. However, the sources from which they come from might not be accurate. If I want to look up something quick like what a certain type of food is that I don't know, then I would use wikipedia for that. I used it to look up what a pad thai was. I also have found some things on wikipedia to be false. For example, when I was in high school I looked up the wikipedia page for my high school. Obviously no one had really looked at it too carefully because it said that my school's principal was the head of maintenance. Obviously some one at my high school thought that was funny. I looked today and that was completely erased and all the information that I read, to my knowledge, is true. I think that if someone wants to post something on wikipedia that they think is true than they should. However, they should keep in mind that whoever may be reading this has no idea who it was who posted it so they should try to make it unbiased. As previously mentioned that wikipedia may have a lot of good and true information, I would always double check it just so I don't have all of this incorrect information on a paper that is due! :X

    ReplyDelete
  3. Throughout high school, I was always advised by my teachers to stay away from Wikipedia. I had heard the horror stories from other students too who had sited Wiki and ended up with a failing grade. Therefore, it was in my best interest to avoid using Wikipedia all together and for the most part I did. Then, in 12th grade my world at war teacher did the unspeakable. He asked us to use wiki, no literally told us to use it on all of our homework and projects. Convinced that it was a trap, I tried my hardest not too until I realized how hard the HW was and caved. The very next day I received a 100 on my HW grade. Now, my W@W teacher was a very smart man so I knew if any information was inaccurate he would let us know and he never did. From that point on Wikipedia became my new best friend. I still use it to this very day and have yet to see and negative affects of it. I know that it is completely unrealistic of me to use that as my only source of information so I don't but I definitely use it as a general reference guide. Also, the prank that Stephen Colbert tried to play on Wikipedia and failed just proves that it is not as inaccurate as everyone believes. So stop giving Wikipedia a bad name and start using it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have been using Wikipedia for quite a while despite warnings from many that the information there may be inaccurate. In my opinion, I think that many will post false information as a joke to see it get put there. However, you can usually tell if something is totally way off. I have seen a few examples of people putting false things up there. I don’t have any specific examples though, because they are always removed shortly after. Most of the time, it’s perfectly fine information though. I don’t think it’s something you’d want to cite in a paper however. It’s great to use as a quick reference though to find out general information about something, as Cat and others have mentioned. You just wouldn’t want to use Wikipedia as your only source in a ten page research paper.
    A great thing for me that has happened in the past several times was that while researching a topic, a quick glance at information on Wikipedia linked me to more reputable sources through references on the topic’s page. Just as we added some reference to the St. Rose Wikipedia page today, you can often see if some of those sources are more reputable and can be used in your paper.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Like everyone else I was told to never use wikipedia and about how horrible the website was. However, I never really listened to them either. I used wikipedia for looking up simple information to searching for information for a paper topic. I would also use other resources besides wikipedia though so if I had wikipedia saying one thing and my other resource saying another I'd know something was right and find a third reliable resource to be the determining factor. Most of the time I never had this problem though. I don't think people really mean to put bad information on wikipedia and if they do it's to make a joke and it's usually very noticeable. I will probably always use wikipedia, even when I'm a teacher.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I have used Wikipedia many times but it is not the only resource I rely on. I use Wikipedia to get a foundation when researching or if I need to look up something quickly on google and wikipedia shows up as a source of information. I don't believe it is that great of a reliable resource and I always double check what information Wikipedia gives me. I never actually open Wikipedia.org and search for information, but it is one of the common websites that shows up when I do a google search. I've never found a large amount of information that was wrong on Wikipedia but I have found small things. I think some people do go on Wikipedia to post incorrect information to be funny because it is an open website but it is not hard to decipher true and false information on the site.

    ReplyDelete
  7. After reading that quote that the chief editor of that encyclopedia really made a lot of sense. Wikipedia could be used and thought of exactly like a public restroom. You really don't know who has used it or been on the site right before you. I think that Wikipedia could be used with a lot of caution. But also, you must take into consideration that anyone who is a human can sign up to change the information about something. I do use Wikipedia but I also have to double check what I am researching, to make sure the information is correct. Wikipedia could be used for anything, as long as you're double checking what is being said and what you are using. The worst thing to do is cite Wikipedia and use wrong information in a paper. But one question I would like to pose, is if this is such a bad website and wrong information and anyone could add to the information, why don't they just get rid of it? I mean everyone is always talking about hw horrible this is, then why don't they just get rid of the entire thing. That makes the most sense and is kind of humorous. What really is the point of Wikipedia, if it is not real information?

    ReplyDelete
  8. I personally have used Wikipedia. Never as a source for a paper but I used it to look up New tv shows or movies coming out. I look at the articles on Celebrities even though they may not be true sometimes. I have never came across anything noticeably wrong with it. I feel that Wikipedia is ok to use if you use it knowing the facts could be wrong. I would never use it as a major argument but it is a good starting point to get your feet wet about a topic just like any other Encyclopedia. I think people do go on a intentionally change things but that is just so they can say haha look I changed this but in reality they have filters and people checking on these things all the time. I have never seen anyone deliberately go on and change something and anyways the coding they use is not the easiest. Yes it is easy in a way but its different then most other coding.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I've been so turned off from wikipedia that I don't bother using it. All throughout high school, librarians and teachers have warned us not to even think of citing it because it will result in a failing grade, no matter how good your paper may be. I do think wikipedia has good intentions, but due to the fact that people can manually change information, that's where wikipedia loses its credibility.

    I, however, have used it to almost "google" certain people or television shows just as a quick reference as other people have mentioned before.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I definitely reference Wikipedia for random facts or questions, possibly even to solve a debate between myself and a friend. It can often be a great site to check out if you're looking for a quick and easy answer where the truth is desired, but not if anything of huge importance is contingent upon it. Yes, people definitely go and change things because they think it's funny, and it's not particularly difficult to edit the content of a page, but the organizers of Wikipedia have learned through experience that their reputation depends on the filters they choose to enact. Early on in its life, Wikipedia was less diligent and the ramifications effected their reputation. While I would never stake a grade or anything equally important on it, I'm not against its use. I once had an astronomy professor actually tell me to use it, since the complexities of the topics were intricate enough that he felt anyone who took that much time for an entry of that magnitude were probably pretty committed to it. Fortunately for me, I've never personally come across blatant untruths in Wikipedia, but I'm sure they're out there.

    ReplyDelete