Just say no to wikipedia

AHHHHHH Wikipedia is not a source, it is not to be confused with an actual encyclopedia or heaven forbid reading an actual book. Why do people cite it like it worth anything, am I supposed to believe it because it is on wiki :bnghd: We have all seen it modified, anyone can modify it. If I remember anything from high school, it is my lit teacher drumming into our heads that wiki is not a source and citing it would result in automatic failure. I understand that can provide some quick reference, but it needs to be double checked regardless, why not cite the back up site. I HATE WIKI!!!!!!!!!


Thanks, I feel slightly better

WIKI is a great source for sources, and some would say it is better than other sources. Anything false on wikipedia will be changed. Anything false in a text book is now a fact.

Yeah definitely, Wikipedia gets looked down on in too many ways. What's good about Wikipedia is the fact that it's one source with a lot of great information.

This is helpful, because going to 30 sites to find bits of information is time consuming and time wasting.

Yeah, don't hate Wikipedia. If I need information fast, Wikipedia is always a click away with a brief summary of what I need. Things that are untrue are removed, things that have no proof are stated as such, and sources are at the bottom. What more do you need?

reply to post by searching4truth


Well,wiki is known to be sometimes fake (the only real info youre going to get there without lies,well maybe some of them is anime,manga info) Knowing that wiki can be edited by 5 year olds and 80 year olds alike.Just search google,avoid wiki or get a dictionary

reply to post by searching4truth


While I do find the site interesting, I also know there can be many errors. I do not know how many people are employed there to go over each article (and in many different languages to boot), so I would imagine it may take a while to correct an error.

I do take what I read on Wiki with a grain of salt.

wikipiedia is a good place to start looking for information. If it speaks the truth and you research what it is saying it can be a great tool. You just have to use it as a stepping stone or compass in search for truth. However I agree using it as a source isn't good.

Nah...the falsities and errors are common and sometimes I have seen them go for ages unfixed. Hence why all my professors refuse to let us cite wiki because it isn't scholarly and not reviewed by competent authority.

-Kyo

As a professional writer, I never use Wikipedia as a source.

What Wikipedia is good for:

• Getting the gist
  
• Finding a list of real sources
  
• Convenient links to related information
  

Not good for:

• Use as a professional source
  
• A standalone source
  
• An end all, be all authority on anything.
  

You gotta back up your source when you use Wikipedia, but it's good in some ways.

I agree it is a great jumping off point

-Kyo

Thanks everyone. Yes, typically I see wiki as a starting point, I have no problem with someone looking at to "get the gist" (as someone mentioned). I was/am/can be again frustrated that many use it as the almighty source on knowledge and some believing that it is infallible. Thanks again.

Funny thing about Wiki is that people always complain about it yet most people still use it anyway. It is all a matter of searching your desired info, then backing it up by continuning your search! I love Wiki. It is very accessible, quick and easy. I still read as I am a literature and history nut already and given that I usually know most of what I am searching for, it does not matter to me. I think people just need to break down and realize that Wiki is not that bad.

And how about checking the references or the external links they have for more info? Does not take much work.

I think professors just hate the site because it's an easy way out.