...Wikipedia created in 2001 tagged the free encyclopedia is a multilingual web-based, free-content encyclopedia project based on an openly editable model written collaboratively by a largely anonymous internet volunteers who write without pay. (Wikipedia:About, 2012) Wikipedia has at least 4.8 billion visitors annually, over 85,000 active contributors working on over 21 million articles in 280 languages. (Wikipedia:About, 2012). As a result of this open model, Wikipedia has emerged as one of the largest repository for information besides the encyclopedia Britannica, but does the high number of contributors and volume of information guarantee the credibility of the authors and validity of the information in the Wikipedia encyclopedia? This is one challenge that the owners of Wikipedia will have to contend with for a long era. Credibility strengthens a research work (Spatt, 2011, p. 347) and greatly depends on the author’s qualification (Spatt, 2011, p. 348), regrettably, Wikipedia is written largely by amateurs because they have more free time on their hands and are make rapid changes in response to current [ (Wikipedia:About, 2012) ] events rather than people with relevant educational background and professional experience. The fact that anonymous contributions are allowed on Wikipedia is another source of concern around its credibility and when those with expert credentials make contributions they are given no additional weight which could have assisted the users to judge the...
Words: 653 - Pages: 3
...Wikipedia is a popular online encyclopedia that many rely on as a source for information. However, there are others that question whether the encyclopedia can be cited as a valid and credible source. This argument is based on Learning Team C’s debate on whether Wikipedia is a valid and credible source for information. The viewpoints from both sides will be examined and a conclusion will be drawn as to why Wikipedia is not a credible and valid source for information. Credible According to Lizz Shepherd, a freelance writer, Wikipedia has one of the best Google page ranks of any site in the world and is in the top 10 of Alexa. Regardless of what you search for, the Wikipedia entry is probably in the top three results for that topic. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that allows its users to edit and remove content from any page. Because Wikipedia allows its users to change information brings frequent questions about the validity of the information on its pages. The Encyclopedia Britannica is one of the few sources that most people agree on for reliable, accurate information. Encyclopedia Britannica is considered the standard for finding accurate information. In an attempt to compare accuracy, the journal Nature ran a large-scale test of the information in Wikipedia entries versus the same entries in Encyclopedia Britannica (Shepherd, 2010). Nature’s results of the test revealed that both sources had numerous errors, Wikipedia, 2.86% and Encyclopedia Britannica...
Words: 616 - Pages: 3
...Is Wikipedia a Credible and Valid Source of Information? Management 521 July 25, 2011 Is Wikipedia a Credible and Valid Source of Information? Abstract Team A debated on whether Wikipedia is a credible and valid source of information. The team was divided into two groups, one side for and one side against. Among the five team members only one (the author) sided for Wikipedia as a credible and valid source. The debate lasted for seven days. Great points were raised by each team members to prove what they sided for. Is Wikipedia a credible and valid source of information? Wikipedia is an online source of information; it is the counterpart of Britannica in the modern computer world. “Wikipedia is about as good a source of accurate information as Britannica, the venerable standard-bearer of facts about the world around us,” according to the study: Wikipedia as accurate as Britannica by Daniel Terdiman. The modern computer world brought major changes around us; it introduced a modern way of doing research through the evolution of Wikipedia. “If we value the pursuit of knowledge, we must be free to follow wherever that search may lead us. The free mind is not a barking dog, to be tethered on a ten-foot chain” (Stevenson Jr., 1900-1965). “Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia, but it is not helpful in many ways. It is uncomfortable to use as source of information for both academic and professional writing because of the fact that anybody with access to the internet...
Words: 1083 - Pages: 5
...Wikipedia and its Credibility Wikipedia and its Credibility The Wikipedia is a free, online encyclopedia that lets every individual with Internet connection write and edits its articles. Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger launched their creation in 2001 giving an opportunity to all willing people to work together to develop a common resource of knowledge. Many people have different believes and ideas about Wikipedia, therefore, some tend to think of it as a credible and valid source of information, others strongly disagree. “Since all the books and articles have been chosen for publication, each one has presumably undergone some form of selection and review” (Spatt, 2011, “p.”339-340). Unfortunately, this statement is simply not enough to say that one can trust Wikipedia just because it exists. Issues with “Vandalism” In 2003 IBM researches conducted a study to find how rapidly the editors remove the false information in the articles of Wikipedia and discovered that “vandalism is usually repaired extremely quickly-so quickly that most users will never see its affects” and that Wikipedia had “surprisingly effective self-healing capabilities” (IBM, 2003, para. 3). This statement is not always true. Waldman (2004) tells the following story to disprove the above point: one blogger who goes under the name of Frozen North, made a point of deliberately making a number of minor errors on a number of entries at the start of September. He made five changes and it took at least 20 hours...
Words: 1136 - Pages: 5
...Wikipedia: Appropriate For What The online encyclopedia Wikipedia has grown impressively since its creation eight years ago. Its 8.2 million entries in 253 languages have been written entirely by web volunteers. That sounds like an impressive story of success, if it was not the polemic behind it. Whereas many defend the free source of information others ban the website because the writers are anonymous volunteers and the revision process questionable. If the source people are using for writing an essay is not reliable so they are not. That is a very simple sentence that demonstrates how dangerous it can be avoiding to evaluate well the sources of information used as a baseline for our creation. A good source of information needs to be impartial, showing different points of view about the subject, has to have the right style and tone, depending on our audience and purpose of writing, needs to be updated, and the author to have the ideal credentials to write about the topic with property. Most of the critic against Wikipedia resides in the argument that nobody can trust a source that everyone can edit, and it does make sense, but radicalism is not needed. The historian Waters (2007) have said that the absence of accountability of the website is reason to ban students from using Wikipedia in research where they are responsible for informational accuracy. That is truly an argument that needs to be considered when discussing if the source is valid for formal researches, but why...
Words: 744 - Pages: 3
...Wikipedia is often found by most teachers to be a bad source to get information from. This is because everyone in the world is allowed to get on and edit any article they want as long as they have a Wikipedia profile. In order to figure out if Wikipedia is a reliable or an unreliable source to get information from for a college level paper, I will be checking an article on the All Blacks rugby team for a reasonable amount of information on the team, and their accomplishments. I will be looking at the accuracy of that information, and the validity of the references that are listed for the article in Wikipedia about the All Blacks. The All Blacks are a rugby team from New Zealand that has had a lot of success over the hundred years they’ve been...
Words: 980 - Pages: 4
...Valid Research Resources Students in higher education have a plethora of research resources available. These resources include traditional items and virtual or web-based items. Traditional items, such as printed textbooks and professional journals, are generally accepted by institutions of higher education as valid resources to obtain peer reviewed articles. Virtual items, such as search blogs and wikis are not widely accepted as valid resources to obtain research materials. Blogs and Wikis by design are virtual resources available to anyone for posting an opinion or information. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a Blog as ‘a Web site that contains online personal reflections, comments, and often hyperlinks provided by the writer’ (Blog) and a Wiki as ‘a Web site that allows visitors to make changes, contributions, or corrections’ (Wiki). The slow acceptance of virtual resources is mainly due to the lack of control of changes, contributions or corrections to these sites. A well known example of a Wiki is Wikipedia. According to Wikipedia, it began in January 2001, to allow collaboration on articles prior to entering the peer-review process (History Para 1). As of May 2014, Wikipedia is the world's sixth-most-popular website (Alexa Para 1) and is the largest general-knowledge encyclopedia online, with over 31.5 million articles, in 287 languages.(Stats Para 2.9) This paper will review the pros and cons of using Wikipedia as a valid resource for students and review resources...
Words: 1530 - Pages: 7
...Arguments For and Against Wikipedia as a Valid Research Resource What constitutes a valid resource for academic research? According to the University of Colorado Boulder, there are three main items to look at in the evaluation of a source. These three items are credibility, validity, and relevance (Colorado, n.d.). The credibility of the author is the first step in determining whether or not to use a given source. You must think about the author as a scholar and determine what makes them qualified to be writing this article or paper. Some things to look at are formal education, history of research on the topic at hand, as well as any other experience with the topic such as the author’s career (Colorado, n.d.). The next step in determining the quality of a research source is to look at the validity of research contained in the article or paper. You may want to look at the position the author takes: is it biased to one side or the other, or is it written objectively to give both sides a fair argument? You can also ask yourself: is the argument made based on research rather than the author’s own experiences? One of the most important things to take note of is whether or not the information is cited (Colorado, n.d.). Just because an article is written well does not mean that it contains correct information. A well-written article also does not mean it is a valid source for research purposes. The third and final step in the evaluation of a research source is to look at whether or...
Words: 1417 - Pages: 6
...To see if an article on Wikipedia is valid, I would look to see the sources they list to see where they got their information. I would look for primary source documents and for trusted books or websites by historians who are experts in that field or educational organizations or universities. If the author of a Wikipedia page hasn’t listed many sources, or websites with .com, then I will not trust that article as much compared to one that lists many sources which include primary sources and valid secondary sources, such as books. People can contribute to Wikipedia relatively easily. The only requirement for posting an article is that you are a registered user. Wikipedia posts suggested guidelines that you should follow such as not using more than a couple sentences from other material. These guidelines aren’t enforced though. They are suggestions that Wikipedia has put up to make sure your articles aren’t plagiarizing work. Wikipedia also provides you with many tools for people to make well-written and educational articles. There is a flip-side to this creational freedom though. Because there is so much freedom and the extent of their enforcement are suggestions, it is very easy to post an article with stolen or faulty information....
Words: 555 - Pages: 3
...Writing an Argument; Wikipedia Jesus Manuel Acosta-Vargas University of Phoenix MGT/521 Management Prof. Elsie Jimenez-Galarza Writing an Argument Today in this century that “we” live, must student like surfing in the Internet to find his resources. The Internet as of the present time contains a several encyclopedias online and research’s websites of all kinds. Some of these types of research’s websites are reliable in some points, some are credible investigations some not, some are valid point of view, and other websites are not developing any of these criteria and lack bias. I am going to writing an argument about the infamous Wikipedia online encyclopedia and his credibility in the web. Wikipedia from scratch we have to make some question; have a valid point of view? Have some credible sources? Is reliable source of information and good research to an essay? In addition to that i have to develop an argument based upon are the outcomes about the debate pro Wikipedia and against Wikipedia. And to support all the argument against Wikipedia, I going to identifying each criterion used to analyze and evaluate all the credibility sources. Some research demonstrates that Wikipedia’s articles that lack biases. Some articles are lack of ideas and neutral point of view too. Head and Eisenberg (2010) write that Wikipedia is a source that is used in 85% of the work course of university students and in 91% of related searches problems...
Words: 946 - Pages: 4
...an online encyclopedia, Wikipedia. There has been a debate in recent years about the credibility of the encyclopedia. This paper will research the four steps to fairly presenting an argument, and how there four steps relate to the Wikipedia debate. Present Both Sides of an Argument The first step to writing an argument is to present both sides of the argument. A one-sided presentation will make you appear to be either biased or sloppy in your research. If the sources are available and if their views are pertinent, they should be represented and, if you wish, refuted in your essay (Spatt, 2011). The base of Learning Team C’s argument on the credibility is how the information is added to the online encyclopedia. Wikipedia allows users of the website to add information to the topics covered on the website. Members of the team felt that is discredited information found on the website. Once the information is added to the website, Wikipedia has a panel of personnel that verifies all information added. Other members of the team felt that because this system is in place, it credits the information. Provide an Account of the Argument Wikipedia is a source of information that is not credible in the eyes of the University of Phoenix. Members of the team felt that this discredited the source of information. One interesting point was made is a team member had a University of Phoenix instructor that served on the panel of personnel to verify the information posted to the website....
Words: 692 - Pages: 3
...Essay Plan Introduction: Thesis: Wikipedia is not a creditable source of information for tertiary-level writing. Body Paragraph 1: * Meaning of Wikipedia * Misleading readers * Vandalism * Reference Gorman Body Paragraph 2: * Academics publishing work * Editing * Reference Lu and Askin Body Paragraph 3: * Counter argument * Credibility * Reference Lu and Askin AND Crovitz and Smoot Conclusion: Convenient but not accurate! The purpose of this essay is to provide insight as to why Wikipedia is not a creditable source of information for tertiary-level writing. Tertiary-level writing involves the use of valid reference sources to show supporting evidence. Anyone can contribute anonymously and edit pages in the non-profit internet encyclopaedia, Wikipedia, automatically reducing the credibility of the popular website. Wikipedia is known as the free encyclopaedia, an encyclopaedia in Gorman’s opinion (2007, p. 273) is ‘created by experts and monitored by professional editors who themselves are often subject experts’ and believes that Wikipedia should be recognised for what it is, ‘opinions untested by experts’. Wikipedia has a large amount of worldwide anonymous volunteers that monitor, and then clean up articles. Professionals may not want to give out their knowledge for free and therefore posts that are incorrect will never be corrected by the appropriate person. On the other hand, people who claim...
Words: 665 - Pages: 3
...Wikipedia as a Credible Source Jon Castillo MGT521 November 19, 2012 Robert Carter Wikipedia as a Credible Source As everybody knows, Wikipedia is an online collaborative encyclopedia, which is created outside the traditional authorship, editorial, and copyright constraints (Parker, Strickler, Banappagari, 2012). In the simplest terms, the website is used to express encyclopedic knowledge over the Internet. It is designed to allow contribution of new information or the correcting of information contributed by others. The website is full of information, but how much of that information is accurate and should actually be considered credible is up for debate. On one side it is argued that use of this information is credible and valid, and on the other side it is argued that the information is unreliable and not worthy of citation. Arguments for Wikipedia Wikipedia is basically a free encyclopedia that allows users to edit the information it contains. In the website’s own words, Wikipedia states that “their scientific articles come close to the level of accuracy in Encyclopedia Britannica (Wikipedia, 2012)”. When an outside source edits information it is reviewed and tested for reliability. Any edited information that is not accurate is taken out of the section that it appears in. The process of scrubbing doesn’t happen as quickly as preferred by most people, but the process does lead to the information being reliable. “The website’s ease of use is expected to serve...
Words: 869 - Pages: 4
...Wikipedia is a Credible Source of Information Dalia Alawami MGT/521 June 18, 2012 Ms. Sandra Griffin Wikipedia is a Credible Source of Information “I have always viewed the mission of Wikipedia to be much bigger than just creating a killer website. We're doing that of course, and having a lot of fun doing it, but a big part of what motivates us is our larger mission to affect the world in a positive way”.(Jimmy Wales) When Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger lunched the web based encyclopedia Wikipedia, the basic idea which they wanted to provide is offering considerable source of information that is affordable to anyone who has an access to the internet. The main theme of Wikipedia is the editable tool available in the web site, any internet user who has an account in Wikipedia can edit or add information to any article or writing new article. However, this point itself is the most controversial aspect of Wikipedia. Since normal users are writing & editing articles that means accuracy of mentioned information can’t be considered in researches, well this is the claiming of people who are against the idea of Wikipedia. Those claims lead to several studies & comparisons done by experts & academic figures through the last 10 years. Since the creation of the site 2001 the argument has been started and still ongoing. Too many questions been aroused, “Who is writing those articles?”, “Why some articles are not supported with resources?” “Why identity of the writer...
Words: 888 - Pages: 4
...Topic Selection: What do you care about? This is a persuasive research paper, which means you are taking a position on a contemporary issue that you care about and setting out to prove that your position is correct with strong, convincing sources. How many sources? * at least four sources for College Prep students * at least six sources for Honors students Of course, you need to set out to support an idea that is capable and worthy of being supported—not something completely obvious. Because one of the major course objectives is to write about what you believe in (as you find your writing voice), you will be allowed to choose your own topic for this persuasive research paper, so long as it is not a topic you have written about already for another class (remember: your intellectual and personal integrity should be important to you, so research something new to you, which is most of the “fun” of research). I must also approve your topic before you begin writing your paper. In order for me to approve your topic, you must have at least four reliable, strong sources in your hand that you have read, highlighted, and taken notes on. Conducting Good Research Many high school students do not know how to conduct strong, valid research—perhaps because we now live in the world of Google, which...
Words: 1960 - Pages: 8
