Wikipedia

History of Wikipedia” the author Dan Fletcher explains how Wikipedia was founded and the complications they fixed. In the first paragraph, he was explaining how Wikipedia started with its first article on a Norwegian actress Beate Eriksen. That the article reached 3 million entries from other people, and how impressive it was. Then he talks about how Wikipedia.com went live on Jan. 15, 2001 and how fast it made its self-popular on the Ethernet. During the proses of popularity since Wikipedia had an issue

Wikipedia the site where users are able to change the work made by authors is not a credible source.Wikipedia does not have a way to make sure the information users seek is fact or fiction due to the fact that it does not have any security measures to prevent users from making unauthorized changes to information, which makes it unreliable for research.Wikipedia should not belong in the college classroom for doing research and should be banned from the classroom for having false information.The site

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

Against Wikipedia As Wikipedia has become more and more popular with students, some professors have become increasingly concerned about the online, reader-produced encyclopedia. While plenty of professors have complained about the lack of accuracy or completeness of entries, and some have discouraged or tried to bar students from using it. “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

Is Wikipedia A Reliable Source In this paper I will be discussing the debate between pro Wikipedia’s Dwight Reed, and Rachel R. Wright, and con Wikipedia’s Nicole Irwin, Michelle Douglas, and Ivy Leigh. During the debate between Learning Team B members we debated over different points of views regarding Wikipedia as a reliable source. Debating Wikipedia Almost everyone knows about Wikipedia. Heck, every time you use a search engine like Google, Wikipedia shows up as a source for information

Wikipedia is an online resource that is visited by millions of people daily. Just about every subject on the planet is covered in this online encyclopedia. Sooner or later, you'll probably start thinking about writing an article for Wikipedia. The fact is that there are a large number of writer's that truly enjoy editing and writing for Wikipedia. Certainly, many writer's enjoy editing articles on the site. Perhaps, you are a writer and would like to start writing a complete article for Wikipedia

Wikipedia is a popular social media site that is used by people all over the world. The two articles, “The Decline of Wikipedia” by Tom Simonite and “The Rise and Decline of an Open Collaboration System: How Wikipedia’s reaction to popularity is causing its decline” by Aaron Halfacker, R. Stuart Geiger, Jonathan Morgan, and John Riedl, both argues about the decline of popularity in Wikipedia over the years of its creation. Both of these two articles include a recognition of the claims being made

Bias in Wikipedia Content on Famous Persons,” investigates if there is any cultural bias in Wikipedia biographies. The writers started by discussing what Wikipedia is and some of the issues with it. Some of these issues include: lack of accuracy, unknown motives, uncertain expertise, volatility, unconfirmed or lacking sources, and selective coverage biased by the specific interest of contributors. The authors decided to test the last concern; they formed a hypothesis and tested Wikipedia in two different

background of that source itself. One of the most famous examples of this idea is the digital encyclopedia Wikipedia. Every student has been warned to be careful of what they read on this website and take as true because of the fact that everyone is able to make edits on the articles. Comparatively, a newer digital encyclopedia called Conservapedia claims to be the trustworthy version of Wikipedia. Even though there are specific deference’s between the encyclopedias, they still share many of the same

When it comes to the topic of Wikipedia, most of us will readily agree that you can get some valuable information from the website. Where this agreement usually end, however, is on the question of credibility. Whereas some are convinced that the website is a waste of time, other maintains that it can serve some purpose. Wikipedia has certain guidelines that must be met before a person can submit an article; it must have been covered in an academic journal or in the mainstream media. This is a way