[Ugnet] Wikipedia Founder Discourages Academic Use Of His Creation

[Semei Zake]

FYI - Semei

==========================

The Chronicle Of Higher Education

 

June 12, 2006 Wikipedia Founder Discourages Academic Use of His Creation Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia compiled by a distributed network of volunteers, has often come under attack by academics as being shoddy and full of inaccuracies. Even Wikipedia’s founder, Jimmy Wales, says he wants to get the message out to college students that they shouldn’t use it for class projects or serious research.   Speaking at a conference at the University of Pennsylvania on Friday called “The Hyperlinked Society,” Mr. Wales said that he gets about 10 e-mail messages a week from students who complain that Wikipedia has gotten them into academic hot water. “They say, ‘Please help me. I got an F on my paper because I cited Wikipedia’” and the information turned out to be wrong, he says. But he said he has no sympathy for their plight, noting that he thinks to himself: “For God sake, you’re in college; don’t cite the encyclopedia.”   Mr. Wales said that leaders of Wikipedia have considered putting together a fact sheet that professors could give out to students explaining what Wikipedia is and that it is not always a definitive source. “It is pretty good, but you have to be careful with it,” he said. “It’s good enough knowledge, depending on what your purpose is.” In an interview, Mr. Wales said that Wikipedia is ideal for many uses. If you are reading a novel that mentions the Battle of the Bulge, for instance, you could use Wikipedia to get a quick basic overview of the historical event to understand the context. But students writing a paper about the battle should hit the history books. Comments I find the best use of Wikipedia is when I need to get a slightly biased, almost neutral opinion on a person. For example, I did’nt get the Family Guy jokes about Roman Polanski, and Google did not tell me what made people make fun of him. Then I checked Wikipedia and bam! — Sean    Jun 13, 12:25 AM    What kind of idiot cites Wikipedia? The point of citation is to hold an individual responsible, or to give credit to an individual. The nature of Wikipedia is collaborative, and thus non-static and in constant flux. There is simply no credit to give, and thus no accountability for the truth of the arguments. I appreciate Wales suggestions – it is quite good (I use it all the time) for broad overviews of unfamiliar topics. It has its place, but an academic source it is not. — Grant    Jun 13, 01:00 AM    Never assume anything from one source is correct. If you can’t find two other people willing to risk their reputation’s on the information then it’s probable not worth risking yours. — Philip    Jun 13, 01:00 AM    How are history books any more definitive than wikipedia? It’s called “his-story” for a reason—it’s a version of the past. Original sources are generally preferable but quite rare. If a college student can use any other encyclopedia or library book, why not wikipedia? Inspite of the prejudices, it’s not less accurate (generally). How many books in a library are primary resources? No encyclopedia is, yet they are generally accepted. — Matthew C. Tedder    Jun 13, 01:01 AM

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

_______________________________________________
Ugandanet mailing list
Ugandanet@kym.net
http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet
% UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/


The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including 
attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way.
---------------------------------------