The Non-Profit Wikipedia Website In The World

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).

Launched on 15 January 2001, Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia that uses the web platform for online users to access. Boasting with over 26 million pieces of writing in 285 languages, Wikipedia has transformed to be a giant in the field of search engines optimization technology. The open source concept that it rides have made it cheap to access and a better choice for many online users. This is especially among the users who find it cumbersome to follow prolonged registration processes to access information on the internet. Any search term queried on the Google™ home page search engine will definitely give a hit from the Wikipedia site, and if not present, a prompt will request the user to create a page for such a term. In this way,

“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.

When students are doing research on the internet, Wikipedia is usually one of the first site to appear. For students, the site is usually tempting to click, but they are quickly reminded by their teachers that Wikipedia should not be used as a site of knowledge. They label the site as inaccurate, unreliable, and uncreditable. In Boyd’s article she writes that teachers consistently tell students to stay clear of Wikipedia at all cost. Students should not have to see the site as tempting. They should be allowed to use it and embrace the site. Wikipedia has so much educational potential and should not be ignored by teachers. Boyd also writes that some analyses have shown that Wikipedia’s content is just as creditable as, if not more reliable than, more traditional resources.

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

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

|Wikipedia |Wikipedia is not a reliable source. It is an online encyclopedia where that |It is not a validity source. The web site has no peer review and the information can |

Jimmy wales founded the Wikimedia (a non-profit encyclopedia) it’s as a charitable organization, his goal is to encourage the growth, free distribute knowledge and information, development the world, providing the full content of projects to the public, and it is a multilanguage encyclopedia. The Wikimedia Foundation operates some of the largest collaboratively edited reference projects in the world, including Wikipedia, the 5th most popular website in the

But like everything else this can also have it’s draw backs. Because there is so much information out there that is not credible, the problem is how do we know which one is and which one is not. I am glad that I have found out that the wikipedia site is not a reliable source because this is one of the first ones that pops up after we input what we want to find out. This

The sources of the Wikipedia article are obviously one of the most important things that we check in order to make sure that the information the article has is reliable. As I was looking through the sources, I happened to see some links to websites that when clicked on, they didn’t arrive to any type of website or it would send me to a page that would say,” this page no longer exists.” This is obviously an issue due to the fact it is possible that the information from the article is old and no longer valid. Due to this, I came to the conclusion that some of the sources on the Wikipedia article are no longer acceptable and should be updated. If I used Wikipedia for my neighborhood project, there

In the article How Google, Wikipedia Have Changed Our Lives, the author Jennifer talks about how students today use Google and Wikipedia more than students did back then. The author says that back when she was in high school, she had to use an encyclopedia to do her research. Now that technology is out, she uses the internet more to research about almost anything and she finds it hard to stop using. Learning back then for Jennifer, she had to rely on getting her information from her teacher and also went to the book store and look up books that best fit the topic she was learning. Now, she would just pull out her devices in class and look up information instead of being patient and waiting for her teacher to tell her.

Wikipedia, throughout formal education, is often not seen as a credible source through the eyes of many professors and scholars. The idea behind Wikipedia is that the members of the general public can add their own personal knowledge, anonymously or not. The freedom of allowing this can be both beneficial and detrimental to how citizens consume accurate information within a society. The information that citizens of a democracy consume correlates directly with civic engagement and participation. Through the comparative analysis of the Wikipedia article against other, current academic literature, the article exhibits errors that include: Incomplete information, oversimplification of significant events, and bias framing of indigenous peoples.

Badke (2008) begins his article reminding us that Wikipedia although controversial is still the online encyclopedia of choice by 36% of the United States population according to Pew Internet & American Life Project’s findings. (As quoted by Badke, para. 1)

In this new digital age, we must teach students and naïve technology users of the positives, but also dangers of Wikipedia, the information powerhouse.

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