The Role Of Unreliable Wikipedia In Schools

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.

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).

In the Article “Wikipedia Comes of Age” by Casper Grathwohl is published by The Chronicle of Higher Education. His point of view in this article is Wikipedia can be a good source but students and researchers may mistake this as a reliable source. He claims that it is a good formal source instead of main source. The Author feels it confuses students and researchers by having it peer reviewed,edited and having it change all the time can be unreliable for a source. The author talks about the past when you could go into a bookstore to look up facts and references in the past like it’s a lifetime ago but in actuality it was just a short time ago.

In her article, Murley (2010) presents different reasons to use Wikipedia to teach students how to evaluate and edit articles. She believes that she has found Wikipedia to be a valuable source to find a link or reference to answer questions.

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

These two articles are alike and different in many different ways. A way that they are the same is both articles tell why Harriet Tubman was as successful and well known as she was. They however were different because in the second article the author explained how Harriet Tubman decided to find a way to be be free and get the rest of her family free along with other unpaid, hard working slaves.

These two stories have been congested with compare and contrast essays over the past decade to a complete dullness. Yet again, here lies another that did not come from Wikipedia.

In the two articles there are many similarities and differences but they are all on the topic railroads. They show how it affects people and their towns and hows its like working on the railroads. Lets take and look and see the differences and similarities between the two resources.

Furthermore, what makes the qualitative difference between these two articles is the depth of understanding of the

Writers have different styles and niches that they excel at. These two authors cover dissimilar subjects with varying degrees of importance, but the writes give educational items that the readers should consider. Both articles are good because they get the information out with purpose and direction. By the end of the pieces you know what the author’s main points are and why he wrote the report. Although there does seem to be some bias from the first author, there are not any misrepresented truths in either article, just facts and quotes from respected individuals familiar with each

Most of the people who made the changes to the mentioned topic are not even verified by Wikipedia itself, nor any information has been provided to ensure their credibility. As mentioned above, grammatical and punctuation errors make the information sound less scholarly and credible to be used for a school paper. I have noted so many people made changes and the list of sources provided under the topic got me into a bigger confusion on how to through such a long list of authors and verify their credential. Britannica’s sources of information is not very hard to verify but I rather use other sources for my papers such as accredited online libraries and books. I noted that the information provided on Britannica has reliable sources and are being checked by experts but still hard to be used as sole source for my papers. Wikipedia is a good source for general information which enables readers to easily access the information they need but not for students to use for their papers as it can most probably results in really bad

A Comparison of Two Newspaper Articles In this essay I will be comparing two articles taken from local

Both of these papers are writing and following the same situation, yet they both have their separate views. The article end up to be bias and writing in favor of on group the business or the workers and destroying the

Wikipedia is an amazing source of information for me. Everyone that use it correctly may have not problems in finding answers of any question of what they want to know. I use Wikipedia as a source of a general information and for my education. I think Wikipedia is a reliable source of information but at the same time it is important to pay attention where this information came from to avoid surprise of wrong information. Wikipedia does not give a source of cite because it a general information to everyone everywhere. We find and resolve faster anything any kind of topic that we care the most or what we want to know. This website has been created in amazing way with the purpose to help hundreds, millions of people around the world to be informed

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