An article by Jakubovitz and Paul stated the problem with Wikipedia is that information are constantly being made up and posted on Wikipedia. Although Wikipedia have a counter balance in the form that “…site's users, who all have editing privileges, ensure that false entries are quickly fixed.” Because of this lingering doubt of the credibility of Wikipedia, proper academical works that uses Wikipedia as a source are looked down and discourage or ban for college citation.
Wikipedia, full of lies?
However is Wikipedia truly that unreliable? According to BBC, a research conducted by the British journal “Nature” found very few differences in Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britannica. According to them, “The free online resource Wikipedia is about as accurate on science as the Encyclopedia Britannica, a study shows.”
“Only eight serious errors, such as misinterpretations of important concepts, were detected in the pairs of articles reviewed, four from each encyclopedia," reported Nature. However it did noted that entries in Wikipedia are poorly written in comparison to Encyclopedia Britannica.
Recently, Wikipedia is gaining more acceptances among professors. According to Maxwell L. Child, who works for an university newspaper, The Harvard Crimson, “…some Harvard professors and teaching fellows have incorporated Wikipedia, the online collaborative encyclopedia, into their syllabi.” Believing that their student will be able to filter out reliable information within Wikipedia itself as it is very accessible and valuable tool for students.
My 2 cents
As for myself, I will stick to the fact that Wikipedia is in fact invaluable and the information provide can be a life safer. However I am also aware that not a lot of students are capable of filtering out which article is reliable and which isn’t so I don’t have a problem with lecturers not accepting Wikipedia as a source. Honestly, I believe that the true way to utilize Wikipedia is the references that they provide for reliable entries and those information are accepted.
We don’t have to beat the system, we students just need to work around it. For all it’s worth, LONG LIVE WIKIPEDIA! And hopefully Wikipedia will be reliable for lecturer to accept before I graduate.
References
1. British Broadcasting Corporation, 2005. Wikipedia survives research test. Viewed on 6 June 2007 at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4530930.stm
2. Child, M, 2007. Professors Split on Wiki Debate. Viewed on 6 June 2007 at http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=517305
3. Jakubovitz, J & Paul, D, 2006. Wide World of WIKIPEDIA. Viewed on 6 June 2007 at http://media.www.emorywheel.com/media/storage/paper919/news/2006/04/21/News/Wide-World.Of.Wikipedia-1865022-page2.shtml
However is Wikipedia truly that unreliable? According to BBC, a research conducted by the British journal “Nature” found very few differences in Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britannica. According to them, “The free online resource Wikipedia is about as accurate on science as the Encyclopedia Britannica, a study shows.”
“Only eight serious errors, such as misinterpretations of important concepts, were detected in the pairs of articles reviewed, four from each encyclopedia," reported Nature. However it did noted that entries in Wikipedia are poorly written in comparison to Encyclopedia Britannica.
Recently, Wikipedia is gaining more acceptances among professors. According to Maxwell L. Child, who works for an university newspaper, The Harvard Crimson, “…some Harvard professors and teaching fellows have incorporated Wikipedia, the online collaborative encyclopedia, into their syllabi.” Believing that their student will be able to filter out reliable information within Wikipedia itself as it is very accessible and valuable tool for students.
My 2 cents
As for myself, I will stick to the fact that Wikipedia is in fact invaluable and the information provide can be a life safer. However I am also aware that not a lot of students are capable of filtering out which article is reliable and which isn’t so I don’t have a problem with lecturers not accepting Wikipedia as a source. Honestly, I believe that the true way to utilize Wikipedia is the references that they provide for reliable entries and those information are accepted.
We don’t have to beat the system, we students just need to work around it. For all it’s worth, LONG LIVE WIKIPEDIA! And hopefully Wikipedia will be reliable for lecturer to accept before I graduate.
References
1. British Broadcasting Corporation, 2005. Wikipedia survives research test. Viewed on 6 June 2007 at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4530930.stm
2. Child, M, 2007. Professors Split on Wiki Debate. Viewed on 6 June 2007 at http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=517305
3. Jakubovitz, J & Paul, D, 2006. Wide World of WIKIPEDIA. Viewed on 6 June 2007 at http://media.www.emorywheel.com/media/storage/paper919/news/2006/04/21/News/Wide-World.Of.Wikipedia-1865022-page2.shtml
No comments:
Post a Comment