Poll: Do you use or trust Wikipedia?

Romblen

New member
Oct 10, 2009
871
0
0
I trust it, Wikipedia requires cited sources and unbiased writing, and it gets enforced by the Wikipedia, which by the way is easily among the best on the internet.
 

vxicepickxv

Slayer of Bothan Spies
Sep 28, 2008
3,126
0
0
Trust, but verify.

I've gotten quite a bit of information from Wikipedia that was correct. It was also information with multiple external links controlled by sources that were not related to Wikipedia.
 

The Heik

King of the Nael
Oct 12, 2008
1,568
0
0
Professor James said:
pretty self explanatory, do you trust wikipedia and use it?
they source all their stuff (or tell you that it isn't proper) they have more comprehensive data than many universities do, and it's streamlined enough so practically anyone can learn with it.

Why wouldn't I use it?
 

Jezzeh

New member
Jan 9, 2009
120
0
0
BrassButtons said:
Generally, yes. Wikepedia tends to be fairly accurate most of the time. While errors can occur (either by mistake or through malicious editing) those aren't overly frequent in my experience, and tend to be corrected quickly. If I doubt the reliability of an article, or if I need more trustworthy sources, then I'll use the links at the bottom of the Wiki article. So it's a good starting point if nothing else.
^ This. Though not allowed to use Wikipedia itself as an actual source for any sort of research (at least, not from an educational standpoint) it does tend to provide some great source material of its own - At least, most of the time.
 

TheLaofKazi

New member
Mar 20, 2010
840
0
0
UberNoodle said:
They do that because of 1) an ingrained distrust by educational institutions for open sources, especially online (a Youth medium), and 2) because kids are generally lazy when it comes to research and they'll paraphrase a Wikipedia article and hand it in! Teachers want the kids to crack open one of those old things called "book", or at least one that doesn't have "RECIPES" or "Harry Pottter" on the cover. That means entering the frightening and uncool cave called "LIBRARY", in which, if the kids suck it up and learn it, valuable knowledge can be gained. Perhaps this is 3), but generally, despite the Net being a conduit for boundless information (unless you are Wikileaks or an "IP infringer", then there are some bounds, sadly), most people daily go to the same limited list of sources. These are usually on their favourite topics and hobbies. The "no Wikipedia" rule by teachers and professors is to force kids to obtain at least some form of useful literacy for study and research, rather than depending on Fast Food aquisition for everything.
See, I would agree with you on that, except that from my experience, teachers have been completely unreasonable with regards to Wikipedia, and while they may point out some legitimate disadvantages, they fail to recognize much of the advantages. In my opinion, the benefits far outweigh the risks with Wikipedia when you know how to use it properly. Reading it is good for getting an overview of the topic. If something seems off or you need more detail, check the original source. For things that don't have a citation, use Google or another search engine to see if the same information comes from substantiated sources. If you can't find anything reputable, then consider whatever unsourced statement you just read bullshit.

Wikipedia is great because it is one comprehensive, organized source of information. Whenever I research a topic, I usually start with Wikipedia, and branch out from there. I can understand teachers prohibiting actually using Wikipedia as a source, the works cited should be the core of the information, the study, the research, the report, ect. I think it should work the same for news sites as well. If possible, you should always cite the original source of the information, not where you heard it from. The news sites, Wikipedia, ect. are just convenient mediums for getting that information to you, but doing good research means going back through that path as deep as possible.

And so far, my school has not taught me any of those research techniques. All they have told me is a bunch of anti-Wikipedia blabber, how to use their stupid, official research engine filled with "approved" stuff, which is extremely retarded. I mean, how can you expect people to become good at research when you essentially hand them a pre-chewed accumulation of information? That's basically doing the research for them. One of the most important aspects of research is to be able to wade through the bullshit, because that's what you are going to find in the real world, bullshit, and you have to learn how to be skeptical of things, double check facts with different sources and identify biases and errors.
 

Eclectic Dreck

New member
Sep 3, 2008
6,662
0
0
I tend to use it if I need a cursory overview of some topic or another or as a good starting point when researching a topic.
 

mexicola

New member
Feb 10, 2010
924
0
0
I use it a lot, it has at very least basic info on pretty much everything, and I prefer looking at nicely formatted pages then trudging through wilderness of the interwebs.
 

havass

New member
Dec 15, 2009
1,298
0
0
I trust Wikipedia rather much. I don't see what all the hype about it being inaccurate is about, it's regulated and not every edit goes through. Though it's good for general facts I wouldn't really rely on it for precise details.
And all those lecturers who say you can't use Wiki or you'll fail the paper? Screw them. Just cite what Wikipedia cites and you're all good.
 

Cazza

New member
Jul 13, 2010
1,933
0
0
Yes

Though Im not stupid I read it and judge what Im reading. If it matches what I believe is true I only check the sites that it's taken from. If it sounds untrue I disregard the information. Check the sites it's from and then look for more information.
 

YouCallMeNighthawk

New member
Mar 8, 2010
722
0
0
Wikipedia got me through my 1st year of college, gave me all the answers, which must have been correct cause i passed. So yes i do trust it.
 

Harlemura

Ace Defective
May 1, 2009
3,327
0
0
I use and trust it, but I only use it for homework research, which I think is safe (Who would choose to go and mess about with info on heart structure, anyway?) or the odd game I've never heard of or just want to research.
Only clearly illegitimate thing I've ever seen was someone using Wikipedia to rant about how Sonic Unleashed deserved better scores from reviewers or something. They were kind enough to leave everything else as it was though.
 

DanielBrown

Dangerzone!
Dec 3, 2010
3,838
0
0
I used it pretty often for schoolwork(never cited that I got it from there though) and occasionally when I need to check up some random fact quickly. While I do trust the page I realise that pretty much anyone can alter the text or the info. Have never seen anything that didn't seem correct however.
 

ZephrC

Free Cascadia!
Mar 9, 2010
750
0
0
Honestly, other than going directly to an expert and having a serious discussion on whatever subject it is that I'm looking for information on, there's really nothing out there that's in any meaningful way more accurate than Wikipedia.

Even half-ass research requires multiple sources, but I have no problem with using Wikipedia as one of those sources as long as you're not doing post-graduate work on a subject that's still under serious study or anything like that. For anything else it's basically as good as a diverse collection of information can be. Anyone that thinks otherwise doesn't really understand how it works. Or how most other resources work for that matter.