I loved this article and I personally use Wikipedia all the time. I like to go on there to get quick information on topics that randomly catch my attention. If I want to know the name of Flash’s rogues gallery or what planet Darth Revan is from there is no better source but I do understand why it cannot be used as a credible resource for academic research.
I often go to Wikipedia on topics I am having to research in order to give me some quick ideas. I like to use it as a launching pad for my research. I will usually take any information that I find relevant and do further research to gauge its level of credibility. I will also use the reference sites at the bottom of the page to search for further detail, although those sites must be carefully screened for credibility also.
I found it fascinating to learn about the ongoing battles behind the scenes from site editors about language, opinion, and credibility. I never gave much thought to the people behind the entries. I also enjoyed learning how the site itself was created using nothing more that wiki software and how it grew so rapidly after it was introduced. I found the information on how the site is monitored and edited interesting as well.
I know that a lot of people have strong feelings about Wikipedia but it should be seen for what it is, a fun site to go and get quick information on topics of interest without having to do a ridiculous amount of research.
I think that is the central point of this article, to disprove the argument that many students make that Wikipedia should be citable. But, I agree that I use it as a launching pad and not as an end result.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Wikipedia, right now, is a site used for quick research. In the future, though, I think it could be used for so much more.
ReplyDelete