Wikipedia Research Paper
Weak e-pedia
Despite the online encyclopedia Wikipedia 's global popularity and massive amount of data covering vast ranges of topics across multiple languages, the validity of the content is questionable. It is a wise decision for universities and other educational institutions to prohibit students from using Wikipedia for reference material. The well known online knowledge bank has close to 4.5 million articles in English alone. With such massive content, it 's probably safe to assume that every person with Internet access has come across one of these articles at some point in their browsing history. The webpage name Wikipedia is very similar to the word encyclopedia and may imply to users that the website is an online version …show more content…
of an encyclopedia and by definition, Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia. It is an enormously abundant compilation of articles covering every topic and subject imaginable in an online version. However, Wikipedia differs from a traditional encyclopedia because it relies solely on it 's own users to contribute and enrich the site 's content. This means that anyone with Internet access can write or edit an existing entry. Alternatively, Wikipedia also relies on it 's own users and volunteers to edit or remove inaccurate information. This is unlike the traditional encyclopedias which the information written is verified for accuracy before it 's published. Due to their longstanding acceptance in the academic community, encyclopedias are a de facto standard for reliable research. Sure, Wikipedia 's founder boasts that the site cautions readers that information contained within it 's own pages may not be accurate, however it can take several clicks to drill down in the website to
find the statement. This could potentially result in many users unknowingly leaning on false and/or biased material for research, studying, or leisure inquiry of a topic of interest. “In March 2009, Irish student Shane Fitzgerald, who was conducting research on the Internet and globalization of information, posted a fake quotation on the Wikipedia article about recently deceased French composer Maurice Jarre. Due to the fact that the quote was not attributed as a reliable source, it was removed several times by editors, but Fitzgerald continued re-posting it until it was allowed to remain. Fitzgerald was startled to learn that several major newspapers picked up the quote and published it in obituaries, confirming suspicions of the questionable ways in which journalists use Websites, and Wikipedia, as a reliable source. Fitzgerald e-mailed the newspapers lettering them know that the quote was fabricated; he believes that otherwise, they might never have found out.” This story reiterates that Wikipedia contains inaccuracies and that is oftentimes relied on as accurate information. Anyone that edits or adds content to Wikipedia may make an innocent mistake. But there have countless cases in which “vandals” add malicious entries that can potentially go unnoticed for months. “Due to the fact that Wikipedia can be edited by anyone with an Internet connection, users can falsify entries. Though in many instances reviewers quickly delete this “vandalism,” occasionally false information can remain on Wikipedia for extended periods of time. For example, John Seigenthaler, a former assistant to Robert Kennedy , was falsely implicated in the assassinations of the Kennedy brothers on his Wikipedia biography for a period of more than 100 days without his knowledge.” Not only was the entry purposely falsified, it was clearly intended to damage John Seigenthaler 's character by an unknown entity. Wikipedia 's policy to allow users to share information anonymously allows potentially malicious persons to falsify information without consequence.
Wikipedia users and Wikipedia administrators alike, may edit to remove factual information in an attempt to hide unflattering facts or disallow information they don 't agree with.
“Administrators on Wikipedia have the power to delete or disallow comments or articles they disagree with and support the viewpoints they approve. For example, beginning in 2003, U.K. scientist William Connolly became a Web site administrator and subsequently wrote or rewrote more than 5,000 Wikipedia articles supporting the concept of climate change and global warming. More importantly, he used his authority to ban more than 2,000 contributors with opposing viewpoints from making further contributions. Furthermore, in 2007, a new program called WikiScanner uncovered individuals with a clear conflict of interest that had written or edited some Wikipedia entries. Employees from the CIA, the Demographic National Party and Diebold were editing Wikipedia entries in their employer 's favor.” This allows users to slant material contained within Wikipedia 's articles in favor of their own beliefs. Therefore, Wikipedia 's vault of information cannot be leaned on to encompass the whole, unbiased knowledge of any topic. A full understanding of all aspects of a topic is essential when researching and studying, whether for academic purposes or not. Relying solely on a resource that undeniably has inaccuracies is without a doubt ill-advised and unquestionably a solid reason for universities to forbid …show more content…
students to use Wikipedia.. Jeffery Young with the Wired Campus reported in 2006 that Wikipedia 's founder, Jimmy Wales, discouraged the use of his own creation for academic purposes, “Speaking at a conference at the University of Pennsylvania on Friday called “The Hyperlinked Society,” Mr. Wales said that he gets about 10 e-mail messages a week from students who complain that Wikipedia has gotten them into academic hot water. “They say, 'Please help me. I got an F on my assignment because I cited Wikipedia '” and
the information turned out to be wrong, he says. But he says he has no sympathy for their plight, noting that he thinks to himself: “For God 's sake, you 're in college; don 't cite the encyclopedia.” It 's most assuredly a good policy if Wikipedia 's own founder advises against using Wikipedia as a single source for academic research. It 's ultimately up to the student to verify accuracy of material while doing research.
It 's part of the research. As with any research, students should seek multiple resources to confirm reliability. On the other hand, students should be educated and guided to look beyond a single source, unreliable or not, when researching. Educational institutions have the ability to instill these habits in students by forcing them to look beyond web resources that generate heavy web traffic for one stop information shopping. Despite Wikipedia 's proven inaccuracies, Alexa.com shows that the online encyclopedia currently holds 6th place for top websites globally and 7th place in the U.S. Regardless of the website popularity, web users should not associate that popularity with validity. It 's advisable to remain skeptical when seeking information from Wikipedia and any other online
resources.
Works Cited
Moran, Mark E. “The Top 10 Reasons Students Cannot Cite or Rely on Wikipedia”. October 27, 2011. Finding Dulcuinea Librarian of the Internet. Web. March 20, 2014
Alexa The Web Information Company. Amazon. 1996. Web. March 20, 2014.
Young, Jeffrey R. “Wikipedia Founder Discourages Academic Use of His Creation”. June 12, 2006. Wired Campus. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Web. March 19, 2014.
Despite the online encyclopedia Wikipedia 's global popularity and massive amount of data covering vast ranges of topics across multiple languages, the validity of the content is questionable. It is a wise decision for universities and other educational institutions to prohibit students from using Wikipedia for reference material. The well known online knowledge bank has close to 4.5 million articles in English alone. With such massive content, it 's probably safe to assume that every person with Internet access has come across one of these articles at some point in their browsing history. The webpage name Wikipedia is very similar to the word encyclopedia and may imply to users that the website is an online version …show more content…
of an encyclopedia and by definition, Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia. It is an enormously abundant compilation of articles covering every topic and subject imaginable in an online version. However, Wikipedia differs from a traditional encyclopedia because it relies solely on it 's own users to contribute and enrich the site 's content. This means that anyone with Internet access can write or edit an existing entry. Alternatively, Wikipedia also relies on it 's own users and volunteers to edit or remove inaccurate information. This is unlike the traditional encyclopedias which the information written is verified for accuracy before it 's published. Due to their longstanding acceptance in the academic community, encyclopedias are a de facto standard for reliable research. Sure, Wikipedia 's founder boasts that the site cautions readers that information contained within it 's own pages may not be accurate, however it can take several clicks to drill down in the website to
find the statement. This could potentially result in many users unknowingly leaning on false and/or biased material for research, studying, or leisure inquiry of a topic of interest. “In March 2009, Irish student Shane Fitzgerald, who was conducting research on the Internet and globalization of information, posted a fake quotation on the Wikipedia article about recently deceased French composer Maurice Jarre. Due to the fact that the quote was not attributed as a reliable source, it was removed several times by editors, but Fitzgerald continued re-posting it until it was allowed to remain. Fitzgerald was startled to learn that several major newspapers picked up the quote and published it in obituaries, confirming suspicions of the questionable ways in which journalists use Websites, and Wikipedia, as a reliable source. Fitzgerald e-mailed the newspapers lettering them know that the quote was fabricated; he believes that otherwise, they might never have found out.” This story reiterates that Wikipedia contains inaccuracies and that is oftentimes relied on as accurate information. Anyone that edits or adds content to Wikipedia may make an innocent mistake. But there have countless cases in which “vandals” add malicious entries that can potentially go unnoticed for months. “Due to the fact that Wikipedia can be edited by anyone with an Internet connection, users can falsify entries. Though in many instances reviewers quickly delete this “vandalism,” occasionally false information can remain on Wikipedia for extended periods of time. For example, John Seigenthaler, a former assistant to Robert Kennedy , was falsely implicated in the assassinations of the Kennedy brothers on his Wikipedia biography for a period of more than 100 days without his knowledge.” Not only was the entry purposely falsified, it was clearly intended to damage John Seigenthaler 's character by an unknown entity. Wikipedia 's policy to allow users to share information anonymously allows potentially malicious persons to falsify information without consequence.
Wikipedia users and Wikipedia administrators alike, may edit to remove factual information in an attempt to hide unflattering facts or disallow information they don 't agree with.
“Administrators on Wikipedia have the power to delete or disallow comments or articles they disagree with and support the viewpoints they approve. For example, beginning in 2003, U.K. scientist William Connolly became a Web site administrator and subsequently wrote or rewrote more than 5,000 Wikipedia articles supporting the concept of climate change and global warming. More importantly, he used his authority to ban more than 2,000 contributors with opposing viewpoints from making further contributions. Furthermore, in 2007, a new program called WikiScanner uncovered individuals with a clear conflict of interest that had written or edited some Wikipedia entries. Employees from the CIA, the Demographic National Party and Diebold were editing Wikipedia entries in their employer 's favor.” This allows users to slant material contained within Wikipedia 's articles in favor of their own beliefs. Therefore, Wikipedia 's vault of information cannot be leaned on to encompass the whole, unbiased knowledge of any topic. A full understanding of all aspects of a topic is essential when researching and studying, whether for academic purposes or not. Relying solely on a resource that undeniably has inaccuracies is without a doubt ill-advised and unquestionably a solid reason for universities to forbid …show more content…
students to use Wikipedia.. Jeffery Young with the Wired Campus reported in 2006 that Wikipedia 's founder, Jimmy Wales, discouraged the use of his own creation for academic purposes, “Speaking at a conference at the University of Pennsylvania on Friday called “The Hyperlinked Society,” Mr. Wales said that he gets about 10 e-mail messages a week from students who complain that Wikipedia has gotten them into academic hot water. “They say, 'Please help me. I got an F on my assignment because I cited Wikipedia '” and
the information turned out to be wrong, he says. But he says he has no sympathy for their plight, noting that he thinks to himself: “For God 's sake, you 're in college; don 't cite the encyclopedia.” It 's most assuredly a good policy if Wikipedia 's own founder advises against using Wikipedia as a single source for academic research. It 's ultimately up to the student to verify accuracy of material while doing research.
It 's part of the research. As with any research, students should seek multiple resources to confirm reliability. On the other hand, students should be educated and guided to look beyond a single source, unreliable or not, when researching. Educational institutions have the ability to instill these habits in students by forcing them to look beyond web resources that generate heavy web traffic for one stop information shopping. Despite Wikipedia 's proven inaccuracies, Alexa.com shows that the online encyclopedia currently holds 6th place for top websites globally and 7th place in the U.S. Regardless of the website popularity, web users should not associate that popularity with validity. It 's advisable to remain skeptical when seeking information from Wikipedia and any other online
resources.
Works Cited
Moran, Mark E. “The Top 10 Reasons Students Cannot Cite or Rely on Wikipedia”. October 27, 2011. Finding Dulcuinea Librarian of the Internet. Web. March 20, 2014
Alexa The Web Information Company. Amazon. 1996. Web. March 20, 2014.
Young, Jeffrey R. “Wikipedia Founder Discourages Academic Use of His Creation”. June 12, 2006. Wired Campus. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Web. March 19, 2014.