Wikipedia definitely gets a bad rap. Even the popular media has spent some time and energy making fun of the user interactive website. Still, semester after semester, I have students tell me how much they love it -- even my thesis advisor told me the other day how useful she finds the website for certain things. Sooooo, I'm not going to tell you what I think of Wikipedia. I want you to tell ME what YOU think of Wikipedia.
Post your comments on using Wikipedia as a research tool. What is its place in the research process? Does it even have a place at all? Why does it get such a bad rap? Do you use wikipedia. Comments are due by July 6th by class time. I'll give a well-developed comment 5 points. If you include at least one strong piece of evidence (by strong, I mean you should include a link or some other source citation), I'll give you 10 points.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Is Wikipedia Really So Bad. . . ? (Evening)
Labels: Evening, Quizzes
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
From watching this video, I can see how people could think wikipedia is bad. He says on the video that, "Anyone in the world can write anything they want about any subject." To me if I didn't know any better I would think that the information on there would sometimes, well most of the time be fake. Yet I never have used wikipedia but from doing this blog, I have found out that wikipedia tells me more about a subject then alot of other web sites. Here are two links, one is wikipedia and the other one is another web site that shows the same information about John B. Watson, but wikipedia has the information down to a T. Unlike the other one that just briefly goes over it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Watson
http://faculty.frostburg.edu/mbradley/psyography/johnbroaduswatson.html
To me This web site for me got a bad rap because of my years in school. They have always told us not to use it because it has faulty information and we would get into trouble if we used it. Now I know as long as you look around to make sure it is ok, then I see no problem in wikipedia
The entire Internet has become a great leveler in many ways. Those media which used to monopolize news and other information no longer do, and Wikipedia has become a lightning rod for their criticism. But Wikipedia has proven its value by making room for itself in spite of its critics.
I use Wikipedia almost daily, and have created a handful of its articles (mostly musical). It is always my first choice as a springboard for studying any subject.
I view Wikipedia as less of a source in and of itself and more of a compilation of sources, combined with other information which is always helpful despite any occasional inaccuracy.
With over 1 million English articles in less than 10 years, all available for free, its value is increasing daily. Not only so, but its general accuracy has been shown to be analogous to that of Britannica!
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article766411.ece
- Les Rinehart
Even though Michael Scott is a comidian, what he says is on course. I've found that comidians like John Stewart,"The Daily Show," come alot closer to the truth than a lot of the main stream media. Wikipedia is a free site that has a great history of being policed by it own readers and contributers. Their criticism can be looked at on their own site at; http://en.Wikiopedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Wikipedia and their editoral process covers 34 pages of checks and balances! Yes, there are the are those few that are kooks and make attempts at screwing up a good thing, but what I'm supprised at as attempts by corperations such as Microsoft to pay people to edit material such as the attempt found on; http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/90088421/microsoft_for_wikiopedia.edits"/> ,in January, 2007 to recruit. The article speaks for itself. I've also found, as another contributor has said, wikipedia is a good spring-board for more concise imformation. As far as I'm concerned wikipedia has my vote and a controbution$ from time to time too. Rob W. evenings
Well in doing research you don't or shouldn't just look at one piece of information and call it quits. That is not called research. So looking at wikipedia as a bases or a stepping stone to start a research, should be acceptable. Granted it is open to editing but that shouldn't mean it's bogus information. It's free, with over 3,321,000+ articles in English. So I think that it's acceptable granted you check your work.
Study: Wikipedia as accurate as Britannica
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1038_3-5997332.html
Professors Learning To Embrace, Not Hate, Wikipedia
http://techdirt.com/articles/20071101/042649.shtml
For the record, I love the office. As for wikipedia, I usually try not to use it. I know that some of the information on wikipedia is true, but some of the information is not true. I just choose to be safe and use more reliable resources in my reasearch. I read an article about someone that was on wikipedia under a false identity. You never know who is posting, even if they give their name. I also like to find sites where it is easier to track their references. On Wikipedia there is a big jumble of references down at the bottom of the article that looks so overwelming.
http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=11576
Wikipedia isn't a bad place to find reasearch information; if you use it correctly. It gets a bad reputation because, it allows anyone at anytime to change and update the sites. Some people find it funny to put false information on it. Wikipedia is safe to use when it is backed up by other references where they found all thier information. I personally only use wikipedia when my teacher specifically says it is okay. Otherwise, most people don't find it as a trustworthy source. It's place in the research process is in the very beginning. It will give you a basic surrounding of your research topic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betty_White
Many people say that wikipedia is providing false information because anyone and everyone can write an article or add to an article. However, at the bottom of the article are sites where the information was found. I use wikipedia for research, however I also use other sites in conjunction with wikipedia. I feel that wikipedia is a great summary of all the other sites that are out there on a specific subject, object, person etc.. Upon reading the wikipedia article you can use the citations at the bottom to see where the information was collected from and if it is a useable piece of information. I found this article on wikipedia informing you on how to use wikipedia for research, it was very helpful.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help%3AAbout#Using_Wikipedia_as_a_research_tool
Post a Comment