2008 Woodie Awards
To source or not to source?
Although Wikipedia provides a wealth of easily accessible information, online database's content quality sometimes questionable
Alaric DeArment
- Page 1 of 1
Ball State University junior Paul Grant found something amiss last summer when he accessed Wikipedia.
"Somebody had erased everything under 'China' and put 'A bunch of chinks live there,'" he said.
That didn't deter him from using the popular online encyclopedia, however, and he still uses it two or three times a week, he said.
On March 18, a Wikipedia user replaced the contents in the entry on uranium with "Winthrop won WOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!(3-18-07)," but the change was fixed within minutes.
Last week, another vandal edited the article about comedian Sinbad to say that he had died of a heart attack, when he hadn't, according to the Associated Press.
Wikipedia, founded by Jimmy Wales and run by the Wikimedia Foundation, has taken criticism lately for a variety of topics, including articles with inaccurate information and contributors' misrepresenting themselves.
In July 2006, The New Yorker published a profile of the site, interviewing a contributor calling himself "Essjay." Essjay, according to the article, was "a tenured professor of religion at a private university" with a doctorate in theology and degree in canon law.
In late February, Essjay turned out to be a 24-year-old college dropout in Louisville named Ryan Jordan, according to a correction The New Yorker published.
The uproar led Wales to announce that from then on, Wikipedia would only allow users to claim expert credentials if they could substantiate them.
With more than 1 million articles Wikipedia has become so popular that some Ball State students take it for granted.
Senior Beth Nicholson said she assumed Wikipedia was reliable and trusted it overall during her time at Ball State. She had also cited it as a source for research papers. Still, she relied on scholarly journals more often and said she's been having second thoughts about Wikipedia's accuracy.
"It's helpful sometimes when you're looking for just basic information," she said.
Freshman Mary Davenport said she used Wikipedia when friends mentioned something she hadn't known before, saying that she considered it somewhat reliable.
"I think it's a good starting reference," she said. "But I don't think it should be used as your only one."
In a 2005 interview with BusinessWeek, Wales said he didn't think people should cite any encyclopedia, including Encyclopedia Britannica, and referred to Wikipedia as a work in progress.
Some members of academia have already begun to crack down on students' use of Wikipedia. According to the New York Times, the history department at Middlebury College in Vermont banned citing it entirely. Meanwhile, at the Ball State Daily News newsroom, a poster hangs from the wall, telling reporters that "Wiki-anything does not count as a source!"
Ball State history professor Anthony Edmonds takes a more moderate approach to the online database.
Edmonds, who said he used Wikipedia for background knowledge and didn't have a formal policy regarding its use by students, said he encouraged students to check information gathered from Wikipedia against other sources.
He said students in his correspondence lessons had cited Wikipedia, though students in his classes on campus hadn't, and that he required them to use JSTOR, an online scholarly journal archive.
"I always encourage students to do library research," he said. "I really worry sometimes with some students that the Internet has become not a supplement to reading … but a replacement for it."
Q&A with Diane Calvin, head of information services, Bracken Library
WHEN MIGHT WIKIPEDIA BE HELPFUL TO STUDENTS?
"I guess if they want really fast information and they weren't terribly concerned about quality, it's a pretty good source, but you don't always know who put something in there."
WHEN SHOULD STUDENTS NOT USE IT?
"They should not use it if they are citing it for a serious research paper because it looks as if they might not know any better."
HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO JIMMY WALES' ASSERTION THAT PEOPLE SHOULDN'T CITE ANY ENCYCLOPEDIA?
"I would disagree with that. The library has a lot of wonderful print and electronic encyclopedias that are put together by reputable publishers, and the articles are written by experts in the field."
WHAT ARE SOME ALTERNATIVE RESOURCES THE LIBRARY OFFERS?
"People can go to CardCat and do a search for an encyclopedia. There's something called Oxford Reference Online. That's a good online source of authoritative dictionaries and encyclopedias. And then another one is called xreferplus. There's a lot of diversity and variety in this database. We use both those resources at the reference desk a lot … and then we use it ourselves when we're doing research."
HOW OFTEN DO YOU USE WIKIPEDIA?
"I've used it a few times, if I'm just trying to get fast information, particularly on a popular topic. It's a nice source for what it is, but if people are using it for college-level research, they might want to check another source, just to make sure the information all matches."
Wikipedia alternatives
Several Wikipedia substitutes exist on the Internet. Some are legitimate and serious databases, while others are less credible.
encarta.msn.com
An extensive, free database that includes an encyclopedia, dictionary, thesaurus and atlas as well as audio and video samples. Users cannot edit or create articles, but they can suggest changes to existing articles.
conservapedia.org
Conservapedia began in November 2006 as a world history project by a class of 58 advanced home-schooled and college-bound students in New Jersey, according to its "Conservapedia:About" article. Conservapedia's format is virtually identical to Wikipedia's, except articles have a conservative slant to counteract what its creators saw as Wikipedia's liberal bias.
citizendium.org
Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger has begun work on what he hopes will be a more reliable alternative to Wikipedia, with writers using their real names and taking guidance from certified experts.
uncyclopedia.org
With a logo consisting of a yellowed, deflated version of Wikipedia's "sphere" logo, this site bills itself as "The content-free encyclopedia that anyone can edit." Its article on uranium describes the radioactive element as "waste product from an
animal's digestive tract expelled through the uranus."
"Somebody had erased everything under 'China' and put 'A bunch of chinks live there,'" he said.
That didn't deter him from using the popular online encyclopedia, however, and he still uses it two or three times a week, he said.
On March 18, a Wikipedia user replaced the contents in the entry on uranium with "Winthrop won WOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!(3-18-07)," but the change was fixed within minutes.
Last week, another vandal edited the article about comedian Sinbad to say that he had died of a heart attack, when he hadn't, according to the Associated Press.
Wikipedia, founded by Jimmy Wales and run by the Wikimedia Foundation, has taken criticism lately for a variety of topics, including articles with inaccurate information and contributors' misrepresenting themselves.
In July 2006, The New Yorker published a profile of the site, interviewing a contributor calling himself "Essjay." Essjay, according to the article, was "a tenured professor of religion at a private university" with a doctorate in theology and degree in canon law.
In late February, Essjay turned out to be a 24-year-old college dropout in Louisville named Ryan Jordan, according to a correction The New Yorker published.
The uproar led Wales to announce that from then on, Wikipedia would only allow users to claim expert credentials if they could substantiate them.
With more than 1 million articles Wikipedia has become so popular that some Ball State students take it for granted.
Senior Beth Nicholson said she assumed Wikipedia was reliable and trusted it overall during her time at Ball State. She had also cited it as a source for research papers. Still, she relied on scholarly journals more often and said she's been having second thoughts about Wikipedia's accuracy.
"It's helpful sometimes when you're looking for just basic information," she said.
Freshman Mary Davenport said she used Wikipedia when friends mentioned something she hadn't known before, saying that she considered it somewhat reliable.
"I think it's a good starting reference," she said. "But I don't think it should be used as your only one."
In a 2005 interview with BusinessWeek, Wales said he didn't think people should cite any encyclopedia, including Encyclopedia Britannica, and referred to Wikipedia as a work in progress.
Some members of academia have already begun to crack down on students' use of Wikipedia. According to the New York Times, the history department at Middlebury College in Vermont banned citing it entirely. Meanwhile, at the Ball State Daily News newsroom, a poster hangs from the wall, telling reporters that "Wiki-anything does not count as a source!"
Ball State history professor Anthony Edmonds takes a more moderate approach to the online database.
Edmonds, who said he used Wikipedia for background knowledge and didn't have a formal policy regarding its use by students, said he encouraged students to check information gathered from Wikipedia against other sources.
He said students in his correspondence lessons had cited Wikipedia, though students in his classes on campus hadn't, and that he required them to use JSTOR, an online scholarly journal archive.
"I always encourage students to do library research," he said. "I really worry sometimes with some students that the Internet has become not a supplement to reading … but a replacement for it."
Q&A with Diane Calvin, head of information services, Bracken Library
WHEN MIGHT WIKIPEDIA BE HELPFUL TO STUDENTS?
"I guess if they want really fast information and they weren't terribly concerned about quality, it's a pretty good source, but you don't always know who put something in there."
WHEN SHOULD STUDENTS NOT USE IT?
"They should not use it if they are citing it for a serious research paper because it looks as if they might not know any better."
HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO JIMMY WALES' ASSERTION THAT PEOPLE SHOULDN'T CITE ANY ENCYCLOPEDIA?
"I would disagree with that. The library has a lot of wonderful print and electronic encyclopedias that are put together by reputable publishers, and the articles are written by experts in the field."
WHAT ARE SOME ALTERNATIVE RESOURCES THE LIBRARY OFFERS?
"People can go to CardCat and do a search for an encyclopedia. There's something called Oxford Reference Online. That's a good online source of authoritative dictionaries and encyclopedias. And then another one is called xreferplus. There's a lot of diversity and variety in this database. We use both those resources at the reference desk a lot … and then we use it ourselves when we're doing research."
HOW OFTEN DO YOU USE WIKIPEDIA?
"I've used it a few times, if I'm just trying to get fast information, particularly on a popular topic. It's a nice source for what it is, but if people are using it for college-level research, they might want to check another source, just to make sure the information all matches."
Wikipedia alternatives
Several Wikipedia substitutes exist on the Internet. Some are legitimate and serious databases, while others are less credible.
encarta.msn.com
An extensive, free database that includes an encyclopedia, dictionary, thesaurus and atlas as well as audio and video samples. Users cannot edit or create articles, but they can suggest changes to existing articles.
conservapedia.org
Conservapedia began in November 2006 as a world history project by a class of 58 advanced home-schooled and college-bound students in New Jersey, according to its "Conservapedia:About" article. Conservapedia's format is virtually identical to Wikipedia's, except articles have a conservative slant to counteract what its creators saw as Wikipedia's liberal bias.
citizendium.org
Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger has begun work on what he hopes will be a more reliable alternative to Wikipedia, with writers using their real names and taking guidance from certified experts.
uncyclopedia.org
With a logo consisting of a yellowed, deflated version of Wikipedia's "sphere" logo, this site bills itself as "The content-free encyclopedia that anyone can edit." Its article on uranium describes the radioactive element as "waste product from an
animal's digestive tract expelled through the uranus."
Viewing Comments 1 - 3 of 3
Jack Shepler
posted 3/28/07 @ 2:33 AM EST
Silly kids. Everyone know that you don't cite Wikipedia... you cite the sources that are listed on wikipedia page. All facts on wikipedia are supposed to be cited with sources. (Continued…)
Jonathan Sanders
posted 3/28/07 @ 8:03 AM EST
I think it's a bad precedent to start saying students shouldn't "cite" Wikipedia when people mean they enourage students not to "use" Wikipedia. In this age when kids seem to think plagiarism is no big deal, telling them not to cite Wikipedia means it's more likely kids will use the site and take material from it and just not credit it. (Continued…)
David Gerard
posted 3/29/07 @ 5:39 AM EST
Minor correction: the Uncyclopedia logo is the Puzzle Potato. The potato is Sophia, the mascot of Uncyclopedia.
Of course, our reliability as a source is utterly unquestionable. (Continued…)
Post a Comment