Not "individual practices"; this is an English Wikipedia Policy: >Do not use articles from Wikipedia (whether this English Wikipedia or >Wikipedias in other languages) as sources. Also, do not use websites that >mirror Wikipedia content or publications that rely on material from Wikipedia >as sources. Content from a Wikipedia article is not considered reliable unless >it is backed up by citing reliable sources. Confirm that these sources support >the content, then use them directly.[11] (There is also a risk of circular >reference/circular reporting when using a Wikipedia article or derivative work >as a source.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#Wikipedia_and_sources_that_mirror_or_use_it
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 12:24 PM Kathleen DeLaurenti <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi all - > > Thanks for the responses. Regardless of our individual practices, I don't see > any good coming from Wikipedia positively asserting that it should "never be > cited," and that's the crux of my concern here. > > Best, > > Kathleen > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 1:17 PM Paul S. Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I have never considered user-generated content on Wikipedia to be more than >> what librarians call a "discovery service". >> >> Briefly skimming an article on a subject l may know little about, I >> invariably evaluate the sources rather than the text and hit the cited >> references. In my 15-year experience, even the weakest and most apparently >> biased articles have at least a few refs that lead to citable sources and >> larger literature. >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019, 11:54 AM Merrilee Proffitt <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I completely agree with Kathleen. I would assert that it is a lack of >>> nuance around the nature of information sources and the research task at >>> hand that has lead educators and others to wholesale "ban" the use of >>> Wikipedia. >>> >>> Whether or not a source can be utilized in a research context depends on >>> the researcher, and what information they are supporting with the citation. >>> For my middle school daughter doing some investigation on an element in the >>> periodic table (as she has been doing this week), the Wikipedia English >>> article (or any encyclopedia article) is appropriate for her. For a >>> graduate student in chemistry this would not be appropriate, but the grad >>> student might (appropriately) cite Wikipedia for some basic definitional >>> stuff, just as they might cite a dictionary or something similar. You see >>> Wikipedia utilized appropriately in citations all the time -- why would we >>> discourage this? >>> >>> Having conversations about the veracity of online information is tough. >>> Wikipedia can be challenging because articles are at various levels of >>> development. To my mind, this makes it something that those of us engaged >>> in conversations around information literacy should steer towards, rather >>> than away from, because a) Wikipedia is widely utilized in a variety of >>> contexts and b) it is a great teaching tool for talking about when you can >>> trust information online and when you should steer clear. But saying "no" >>> to any information source without having a discussion about it seems lazy. >>> It definitely does not reflect the type of discourse we should be having, >>> especially now. >>> >>> I look forward to more discussion on this topic. >>> >>> Merrilee >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 9:02 AM Federico Leva (Nemo) <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Twitter doesn't facilitate reasoned arguments. I suppose as usual the >>>> goal was to encourage greater use of the references and other >>>> meta-content of Wikipedia articles, which are excellent tools for >>>> critical thinking. >>>> >>>> Federico >>>> >>>> Kathleen DeLaurenti, 26/09/19 17:55: >>>> > Hi all - >>>> > >>>> > As a librarian who uses and supports Wikipedia, I wanted to bring up >>>> > some issues around the BuzzFeed article posted today about M-Journal >>>> > that has led to some messaging from the WikipediaUK twitter account that >>>> > I find concerning. I'm not sure if this is the appropriate place to >>>> > bring this up, but I wasn't sure where else to reach out. >>>> > >>>> > For those who missed, a citation cite is not manufacturing journal >>>> > articles if a student submits a Wiki article so that it looks like an >>>> > "official" citation in their school research papers. >>>> > https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanhatesthis/wikipedia-fake-academic-journal?bftw&utm_term=4ldqpfp#4ldqpfp >>>> > >>>> > Clearly there are some nefarious potential uses here, but what's more >>>> > concerning is that the WikiUK twitter account has come forward >>>> > forcefully saying that Wikipedia shouldn't be cited in the literature. >>>> > Period. >>>> > https://twitter.com/wikimediauk/status/1177215917534711808 >>>> > >>>> > I work very hard to improve the cite through my courses and academic >>>> > advocacy as do many librarians. It's concern to me to see Wikipedia >>>> > undermining its own authority in such a public way in what appears to be >>>> > a misguided attempt to deflect association with the MJournal site. >>>> > >>>> > Would welcome any insight or ideas on how to navigate this discussion. >>>> > The entire M-Journal use case exists, imho, because we are still >>>> > battling for a critical (not blanket acceptance) view of Wiki as a >>>> > resources, and I find this kind of public statement to be very damaging >>>> > to the hard work so many are doing to create a quality information >>>> > resource. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Libraries mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Libraries mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Libraries mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries > > _______________________________________________ > Libraries mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
