Argumentative Essay : Wikipedia Comes Of Age By Casper Grathwohl

Wikipedia is a collaborative resource, which aims to be a compendium of all human knowledge. In a serious examination of Wikipedia as a credible and valid source of information we need to place our argument within a definable framework. As I will show information has many uses, for the purposes of this paper I will examine the use of Wikipedia for scholarly research, the kind, which I will be utilizing throughout the rest of my MBA program. I will be evaluating Wikipedia based on the parameters set forth by Brenda Spatt. The credentials, Impartiality, style/tone, and currency of Wikipedia will all be examined in this paper (Spatt 2011).

“As educators, we are in the business of reducing the dissemination of misinformation,” said Don Wyatt, chair of the department. “Even though Wikipedia may have some value, particularly from the value of leading students to citable sources, it is not itself an appropriate source for citation,” he said.

In the article “Wikipedia as a Site of Knowledge Production,” author Danah Boyd writes about how educators are against using Wikipedia as a quality source. She goes into detail about how most students are told to stay clear of the site at all cost because their teachers think it is misleading and inaccurate. On the contrary, Boyd mentions that analysis have shown Wikipedia’s content as creditable as, if not more reliable than, traditional resources. She also writes about some of the sites features that people don’t know about like there discussion boards. Wikipedia has had time to mature over the years and should be seen as a reliable and should be used in schools.

Eventhough, the internet can be helpful with education, it can also be unreliable. However, “The Hive” by Marchall Poe, was the openness of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that anyone can use it. This might work for some people specially that ones who attend school or college. This is very helpful for them because in Wikipedia you can search or find anything you would like. Since anyone can write, or delete or use information off of Wikipedia, it makes it less controversial because anyone can put their input into the website. If don’t agree with something, that’s alright because you can add your own opinion. Poe describes how authors of certain wiki pages write with a bias to support their facts. Facts become opinions when feelings and emotions of bias get involved. “Instead of relying on experts to

Should websites such as Wikipedia, Answers.com, and Reference.com be monitored for false information? Author, John Seigenthaler in his narrative article published in 2005 in the USA Today “A False Wikipedia Biography,” he begins his personal story by describing how his character was assassinated by publishing false and malicious “biography” under his name on Wikipedia, the popular, online, free encyclopedia. His first goal is to convey millions of people that Wikipedia is a flawed and irresponsible research tool. His second goal is to raise the awareness of how Wikipedia works. By establishing his credibility, building his case slowly, and appealing to both logic and emotions, Seigenthaler succeeds in writing an interesting and informative

In the Article “How Google, Wikipedia Have Changed Our Lives…” Jennifer Maderazo states that, we’ve become so reliant on electronic information resources. Researching then was implying researching involved going through book after book, making copies, highlighting copies then start to write. Researching Now states that everything research is related to the internet and if not in use there is a feeling of being crippled. In the article learning then gives the feeling of how relying on the classroom experience was more helpful for information. In addition, in learning now says that the tolerance level would be the same as the internet attention span. Based on the past lets us know how we didn’t have the resources to just look up a song or the

College life can be pretty stressful and complicate it at times. There are several things that can help college life become easier and more manageable. One of the main things and if not the most important it will be the ability to identify and separate credible online sources from non-credible ones. It is very true that technology has help make college life easier, with search engines such as Google or Bing at just one click away of distance. The only problem is that with so many choices to pick from how to tell if a source is even worth to look at without having to expend a great amount of time looking at each one through. Even though non-credible sources are easier to find, credible sources

The Internet is an uncensored place, where knowledge flows freely, and uninterrupted. The site en.wikipedia.org, is an online wikipedia freely editable by anyone. Therefore, ideas and knowledge can be exchanged freely, if they are accurate, that is another question. Since it is editable by anyone, information can be false, but in most cases, the information found there is highly accurate and updated frequently. You can find knowledge on a range of topics, from WW2, to Philosophy, even to the Bolshevik Uprising. This is an example of what can happen when the free exchange of ideas and knowledge, is both not limited, and uncensored. “There must be something in books, something we can’t imagine, to make a woman stay in a burning house; there must be something there. You don’t stay for nothing.”(Bradbury, 1953) This quote from Montag relates to a world where knowledge isn’t limited. He ponders why a woman, would stay in a burning house, just for her books, just for the potential knowledge in them.

wikipedia has some pros and many cons as a source. It is a popular source for providing information regarding a topic but we can't use the information provided on Wikipedia for our research papers. It is interesting that anyone can edit information on Wikipedia. This increase the chances of providing the wrong information to the readers and makes it harder to believe the information provided on Wikipedia

Article writing and editing on Wikipedia tends to be a bit more difficult than writing for other websites. Wikipedia is an established encyclopedia site that prefers contributors to follow their strict guidelines. One of their most notable guidelines concerns the neutral point of view. Self promotional articles tend to glorify the good qualities of the writer and avoid the negative aspects. Therefore, writing self promotion articles is not a very good idea. In addition, there are several other sound reasons to avoid writing personal articles. Let's take a closer look.

Wikipedia is a fee online encyclopedia. It is called a wiki, which is a “website that allows anyone to add, delete, or revise content by using a web browser” (unknown). There have been many studies questioning the credibility or accuracy of Wikipedia. The four most studied subjects are as follows; accuracy of the information in the articles, appropriateness of the pictures in articles, appropriateness of the style and focus of the articles, and the susceptibility of exclusions, and the removal of false information. Most damage is corrected extremely quickly, so quickly that most users never see the errors. In 2007 PC Pro magazine put Wikipedia to the test by inserting 10 errors into different articles to see

Even if the public likes it, though, for the most part academic circles do not. Many professors will not allow their students to use Wikipedia. These professors think Wikipedia is trivial, untrustworthy, insulting, and too often completely incorrect. (2008, para. 4) Could this be because the university world is jealous? It is true that true academics are the experts and if a layperson wants the facts, they are the best resource. However, because of the zealous use of electronic

Yet when, through an official interlocutor, I recently petitioned Wikipedia to delete this misstatement, along with two others, my interlocutor was told by the “English Wikipedia Administrator”—in a letter dated August 25th and addressed to my interlocutor—that I, Roth, was not a credible source: “I understand your point that the author is the greatest authority on their own work,” writes the

This material set-off in this fashion in the handout identifies the revision notation for these matters. Guidelines for the Argumentative/Persuasive Essay

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