Un-Reliable Wikipedia?

[pureprayer]

Note: I use wiki all the time im just checking what the Tif community thinks.

 

 

 

Okay teachers at my schools hate Wiki because other people can edit it. I have edited It and put wrong information on Wikipedia once or twice... :-# It was nothing major just some random bored-ness at school. I made Pepsi say that it has 110 grams of sugar and 90 grams of fat. (source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepsi scroll down to the bottom to where it says ingredients)

 

 

 

Every once and a while it gets fixed and you get IP banned from editing wiki but some small stuff that's edited stays there for a while.

 

 

 

I still think 95% of Wikipedia is true and use it alot in my research stuff.

 

 

 

Do you think Wikipedia is reliable?

[llamster]

Some of the articles on there are well-written and accurate, while others just plain suck. I guess the reason teachers don't let students use Wikipedia is that they don't trust students to distinguish between good and bad articles.

[eggzs]

Just believe the cited statements.

[Giordano]

One of my teachers told us to use Wikipedia to get an idea on our project before actually doing it. He told us not to use it as a source, but to check out the websites at the bottom. So basically if "Fact x exists because of y" was in Wikipedia and in two other websites, most likely its true.

 

 

 

But what sucks is that some kids are completely anti-Wiki. They feed in to the overprotective teachers and get their mindset... >_>

[rangeor]

I heard somewhere that wikipedia's more reliable than most of the other non-database webpages. But tbh after editing something about a year ago and with it still being there today, I don't trust it too much. But don't worry, it's nothing anyone's going to be using in an essay or anything, otherwise I would have taken it out.

[Saru Inc]

Dude.. What the [bleep] is this. I was just about to make this same exact topic with the same exact question. o.O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think it is reliable, and most teachers are mistaken, but really, if you're doing a project, any half assed school would give you passwords to various databases, Gale Group being the best, I think, because not only does it do a bibliography, everything is like triple checked so you won't have wrong info, unless you incorrectly infer something.

 

 

 

 

 

So yea, I think it's reliable, but not the best.

[Zierro]

Wiki is awesome, and I hate how it has such a bad rep. They cite everything on the bottom of the page, so if you are skeptical you could just look there. Besides, so far I don't think I ever saw anything on that site that was completely false.

[Ouchy]

It is reliable, but it is like anything on the internet; it might be false information, or it might be true.

[Giordano]

Ah, I just remembered another thing.

 

 

 

If I had the opition to choose Wikipedia or some random unknown website for info, I'll rather go to wiki to be honest. Wiki already has a good reputation for being fairly accurate yet some teachers expect me to go to these unknown sites? (not saying databases here people or .edu sites.)

[Lateralus]

I think the reliability varies from page to page, but for most academic purposes I think it's more than adequate. When it comes to science and history and almost anything else scholastic, Wikipedia is pretty comprehensive. It should be instinctual for people to check the sources anyway, especially on the internet where I always find a higher level of incredulity is required.

[Wizz]

Much more Reliable than the Encyclopedia Dramatica :-#

[Ouchy]

Much more Reliable than the Encyclopedia Dramatica :-#

 

 

 

Heh, it is obvious that it is a fake site by the front page... :?

[warri0r45]

As others have said, it depends on the page and the amount of references it has. In my opinion it's a great starting point to get a solid background of a concept, but it's not something you should reference. I've searched for various topics to do with molecular biology/biochem numerous times and they've never been wrong with anything I've known.

[pureprayer]

Dude.. What the [bleep] is this. I was just about to make this same exact topic with the same exact question. o.O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think it is reliable, and most teachers are mistaken, but really, if you're doing a project, any half assed school would give you passwords to various databases, Gale Group being the best, I think, because not only does it do a bibliography, everything is like triple checked so you won't have wrong info, unless you incorrectly infer something.

 

 

 

 

 

So yea, I think it's reliable, but not the best.

 

 

 

LOL nice i hate when that happens to me. Also I got written up for being on wiki LOL

[Who]

Just use the references at the bottom instead of the actual wiki page. That information has to come from somewhere, and if it is viable, then you have an array of websites at your disposal for whatever school assignment you may have.

[ThurinEthir]

I mainly use Wiki to for random facts, or if I just want to know something. If I'm doing work for school...Depends. I've had teachers who actually encouraged Wiki, and then there are those who completely oppose it. I don't think I would ever use Wiki as a source, but rather the citations at the bottom. If you do use Wiki as a source though, it wouldn't hurt to just double-check whatever you're looking for. Of course, you might as well use the second site...

[Sbrideau]

Heh, I have one teacher saying it's reliable, and even told us to go look especially on it... Not quite plausible that there's a programming language called Bran[bleep], and another one that's called Ook. Although I didn't do more research on them and that they could really exist.

 

 

 

Wikipedia is getting a bit more reliable, that guy in the class said that they started checking the pages before putting them on. We do have to look at the list at the bottom of the page though.

[Blingkachi50]

I love wiki, my favorite site (besides tif) to browse. You can tell if the article is reliable or not and it actually has things on it that I enjoy learning about.

[Cha0sx]

Wiki is great for general use to look up certain things. If you really want to make sure, check the links as others have said. Also, wikipedia has ridiculous editor enthusiasts who 'defend' articles (or so I heard). It's not as easy to get away with vandalizing as those clueless teachers think. There's plenty of thoroughly written articles on Wikipedia that offer more information than even going to a variety of other sites. You can always cross-reference information with other sites too, if you are that skeptical or need to be sure to be precise.

[Zonorhc]

Wiki is great for general knowledge and information on things you don't want to delve too deeply in.

 

 

 

As an academic source, it still isn't accepted widely. If you do use it, as with all sources, for the love of god, cross-reference the things you read to make sure you're not getting a load of bull like what you wrote.

[CubeMage128]

When I have to do a research report about a topic, I usually start out by reading the Wikipedia article for ideas, then confirm information by checking out the links at the bottom as well as other websites. When I have to cite my sources, I'll cite the links at the bottom of the wikipedia article, NOT the article itself.

 

 

 

 

 

The best part about this method is that Wikipedia usually cites the best sources available on the web, so I don't have to trawl through a bunch of junk google gives me.

[dsavi]

The English Wikipedia is obviously the most vandalized, I have never come across any vandalizing on the Swedish Wikipedia. That said, I rarely find vandalized articles on en.wikipedia.org either. Overall, they are a very reliable source. If your teacher doesn't want you to have Wikipedia as a source, give your teacher the sources that Wikipedia cites, I would say.

[Mercifull]

http://www.b3ta.com/links/Lazy_Journalist

 

 

 

:D

[____]

The English Wikipedia is obviously the most vandalized, I have never come across any vandalizing on the Swedish Wikipedia. That said, I rarely find vandalized articles on en.wikipedia.org either. Overall, they are a very reliable source. If your teacher doesn't want you to have Wikipedia as a source, give your teacher the sources that Wikipedia cites, I would say.

 

That's what I have always done, I've actually found really good stuff on subjects by looking at the places wiki articles have cited, better than I got just trying to find it myself anyways.

[raaarga]

I don't use Wikipedia for papers, but if I want to know something about a book or a game or something, I'll look at it. One time I was doing a project, and I looked up Russia, it said "Russia is stupid and gay." and nothing else. That's why I don't use it for papers.