Should you trust a wiki for academic research?
194 views
Skip to first unread message
Dianne
Jun 4, 2009, 12:13:46 AM6/4/09
to lawmaniacs09
As wikis grown in number, size, and popularity, some educators and
librarians have shunned the sites as valid sources of research.
While
many wikis are tightly controlled with a limited number of
contributors and expert editors, these usually focus on narrowly-
defined, specialized topics. Large online wikis, such as Wikipedia,
often involve thousands of editors, many of whom remain anonymous.
Recently, television station reporters purposely vandalized entries
on
Wikipedia for John Lennon and Elvis Presley in an attempt to either
discredit Wikipedia or to test how quickly corrections are made.
Editors quickly corrected the information.
In other situations, rival political factions falsified or
embellished
wiki entries in an attempt to give their candidate an advantage.
Some
wiki supporters argue that most wikis provide adequate controls to
quickly correct false or misleading content and to punish those who
submit it. Some propose that wikis should be used as a starting
point
for researching a fact, but that the fact should be verified using
traditional sources. Should wikis be allowed as valid sources for
academic research? Would you submit a paper to your instructor that
cites wiki as a source? What policies could wikis enforce that could
garner more confidence from the public?
librarians have shunned the sites as valid sources of research.
While
many wikis are tightly controlled with a limited number of
contributors and expert editors, these usually focus on narrowly-
defined, specialized topics. Large online wikis, such as Wikipedia,
often involve thousands of editors, many of whom remain anonymous.
Recently, television station reporters purposely vandalized entries
on
Wikipedia for John Lennon and Elvis Presley in an attempt to either
discredit Wikipedia or to test how quickly corrections are made.
Editors quickly corrected the information.
In other situations, rival political factions falsified or
embellished
wiki entries in an attempt to give their candidate an advantage.
Some
wiki supporters argue that most wikis provide adequate controls to
quickly correct false or misleading content and to punish those who
submit it. Some propose that wikis should be used as a starting
point
for researching a fact, but that the fact should be verified using
traditional sources. Should wikis be allowed as valid sources for
academic research? Would you submit a paper to your instructor that
cites wiki as a source? What policies could wikis enforce that could
garner more confidence from the public?
abd.qayy...@gmail.com
Jun 7, 2009, 4:42:43 PM6/7/09
to lawmaniacs09
The last time I checked, we actually can send in assignments with
internet reference as a source. What would be the use of the vast
knowledge the Internet has to offer if we are deprived from harvesting
it's potential? At least if we were to use wikis, it is a website
dedicated entirely towards information and reference. Yes, there is
potential of being manipulated wrongly, but millions of people visit
the website daily because of research and reference purposes or as an
editor to both. so maybe at least one of the millions and millions of
people who browse through the site each day will notice an anomaly and
quickly correct it. I would like to add that it's purely democracy,
how the website acts. It's not just one person working on a certain
subject to make it a reference article. It's a collective effort,
perhaps not at the same time but the time gap between two edits is not
that long. Besides, as we all know, it IS a website. there could be
more than one person looking at one article and say to themselves
"hey, something's wrong with this sentence!", and if they're smart
enough to notice that something's wrong, then they're probably smart
enough to know the right answer. For any responsible wiki editor,
before any information is to be posted in any wiki, it has to come
from a valid and reliable source. If you notice at the foot of any
Wikipedia article, there will be various references, mostly from books
or newspapers so I think that is reliability of a reliability. It
would be risky for anybody to fake a reference because a reference - a
book for instance - is too specific to be bluffed.
I suggest any wiki website to do a 'floating resource/reference' where
when somebody wants to post or edit an existing article, he/she has to
'float' it until it is approved by majorities or a trusted scholar/
expert on the subject who can and will identify himself or herself.
the floating data will need to have references or any other adequate
evidence of its validity. once that has been done, it could be used as
a valid reference source.
azie
Jun 9, 2009, 10:29:52 AM6/9/09
to lawmaniacs09
>I think wikipedia is a good source for each person to find any information that they needed.
>Wikis should be allowed as valid sources for academic research.
>Wikis actually help us to gain a lot of information.It is an easy way for everyone to search any kinds of info.
>Wikipedia’s articles provide links to guide the user to related pages with additional info.
>Wikipedia’s intent is to have articles that cover existing knowledge and not to create the new knowledge.
>It means that everyone can write wikipedia articles.Most of the articles can be edited by anyone with access to the internet.
>Anyone is allowed to add info,cross referencess or citations as long as they do so within wikipedia’s editing policies.
>Unlike a paper referencess source,wikipedia is continually updated withthe creation or updating of articles.
>It is important to realize that in contributing to Wikipedia, users are expected to be well behave, respecting all points of view, and only add verifiable and factual information.
>Wikipedia has a very low "publishing" cost for adding or expanding entries and a low environmental impact, since it need never be printed.
>Wikipedia also has portals, which organize content around topic areas; our best portals are selected as featured portals. You may also search for articles using the search box on the left side of the screen.
On 8 Jun, 04:42, "abd.qayyum.jum...@gmail.com"
>Wikis should be allowed as valid sources for academic research.
>Wikis actually help us to gain a lot of information.It is an easy way for everyone to search any kinds of info.
>Wikipedia’s articles provide links to guide the user to related pages with additional info.
>Wikipedia’s intent is to have articles that cover existing knowledge and not to create the new knowledge.
>It means that everyone can write wikipedia articles.Most of the articles can be edited by anyone with access to the internet.
>Anyone is allowed to add info,cross referencess or citations as long as they do so within wikipedia’s editing policies.
>Unlike a paper referencess source,wikipedia is continually updated withthe creation or updating of articles.
>It is important to realize that in contributing to Wikipedia, users are expected to be well behave, respecting all points of view, and only add verifiable and factual information.
>Wikipedia has a very low "publishing" cost for adding or expanding entries and a low environmental impact, since it need never be printed.
>Wikipedia also has portals, which organize content around topic areas; our best portals are selected as featured portals. You may also search for articles using the search box on the left side of the screen.
On 8 Jun, 04:42, "abd.qayyum.jum...@gmail.com"
DLA
Jun 12, 2009, 2:55:16 AM6/12/09
to lawmaniacs09
yes.In my opinion, it can be used for academic purposes but not as
the only source that must be used..
We as students should at least have a second source to ensure
that the information obtained was true.
In that way, we would be able to submit papers to our instructor with
wiki as the source
of information without any doubts.
Wikipedia should thighten up their system so that anonymous
people would not look down on them and insert false
information without any fear. Wikipedia should also have a system
that
ensures the information given by the public people
were true and have their personal details so they can easily be
traced.
the only source that must be used..
We as students should at least have a second source to ensure
that the information obtained was true.
In that way, we would be able to submit papers to our instructor with
wiki as the source
of information without any doubts.
Wikipedia should thighten up their system so that anonymous
people would not look down on them and insert false
information without any fear. Wikipedia should also have a system
that
ensures the information given by the public people
were true and have their personal details so they can easily be
traced.
ball balqiszbelle
Jun 13, 2009, 5:20:42 AM6/13/09
to lawmaniacs09
For me, yes we can trust Wiki as a source of acedemic thingy, but mind
not to fully trust the stuff.
How could you open Wiki? I'm sure with the internet right? So while
surfing the net, you can also browse for any other links instead of
Wiki and make your own research on what's true and what's false.
That's it!!
Mercie boku..
not to fully trust the stuff.
How could you open Wiki? I'm sure with the internet right? So while
surfing the net, you can also browse for any other links instead of
Wiki and make your own research on what's true and what's false.
That's it!!
Mercie boku..
eddy
Jun 17, 2009, 11:28:19 AM6/17/09
to lawmaniacs09
wiki should not be the only valid resources for academic researches..
students need not rely fully on wiki as there are others
engine research provided such as google and yahoo..
this is because wiki is easily vandalized by others who likes to play
pranks..
so in the end, students get the false information instead of the real
one..
however, in my opinion, I myself as a wouldn't use wiki
as i'm not very fond of using wiki as one of my source..
On Jun 13, 5:20 pm, ball balqiszbelle <ball_balqiszbe...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
students need not rely fully on wiki as there are others
engine research provided such as google and yahoo..
this is because wiki is easily vandalized by others who likes to play
pranks..
so in the end, students get the false information instead of the real
one..
however, in my opinion, I myself as a wouldn't use wiki
as i'm not very fond of using wiki as one of my source..
On Jun 13, 5:20 pm, ball balqiszbelle <ball_balqiszbe...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Amar Vann
Jun 18, 2009, 1:06:56 AM6/18/09
to lawmaniacs09
after thorough thinking and evaluating, i really think wiki can be
made as a valid source for reference and etc.....
the reason why i am saying that becouse as wikipedia grown to be one
of the biggest, largest reference website in the world, i dont see
why
should we not became part of it.....
always think of the positive side first before going to the negative
part, IF IT IS SO VULNERABLE TO GAIN WRONG INFORMATIONS, WHY THERE
ARE
MILLIONS OF PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD USE IT AS A VALID
REFERENCE......????
THINK MY FELLOW MATES.....
there must a group (a large group of people) of people that have been
hired to make sure each and everyone of the facts, figures,
statistics
etc etc inside wikipedia is valid, true and reliable......
dont be confined to just rely on one SHAKY point to make your
judgement.....
furthermore, Wikipedia's software is carefully designed to allow easy
reversal of editorial mistakes, so, i am extermely sure that anybody
within the range of thir respective knowledge can make corrections
about anything they considered wrong or not relevant.
Wikipedia is continually updated, with the creation or updating of
articles on topical events within seconds, minutes, or hours, rather
than months or years for printed encyclopedias. (i copied this from
the web)
however, we must not rely on just one sources.
we need to be aware on the validity of the information and try to
avoid misinformation that have been added recently and not yet
removed.
just like what pn.lizana said, "you must have a second plan" and if
possible the third and the forth.
so, wiki can be used as reference and can be included as one of the
valid sources of information.
think wisely mates.....;p
made as a valid source for reference and etc.....
the reason why i am saying that becouse as wikipedia grown to be one
of the biggest, largest reference website in the world, i dont see
why
should we not became part of it.....
always think of the positive side first before going to the negative
part, IF IT IS SO VULNERABLE TO GAIN WRONG INFORMATIONS, WHY THERE
ARE
MILLIONS OF PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD USE IT AS A VALID
REFERENCE......????
THINK MY FELLOW MATES.....
there must a group (a large group of people) of people that have been
hired to make sure each and everyone of the facts, figures,
statistics
etc etc inside wikipedia is valid, true and reliable......
dont be confined to just rely on one SHAKY point to make your
judgement.....
furthermore, Wikipedia's software is carefully designed to allow easy
reversal of editorial mistakes, so, i am extermely sure that anybody
within the range of thir respective knowledge can make corrections
about anything they considered wrong or not relevant.
Wikipedia is continually updated, with the creation or updating of
articles on topical events within seconds, minutes, or hours, rather
than months or years for printed encyclopedias. (i copied this from
the web)
however, we must not rely on just one sources.
we need to be aware on the validity of the information and try to
avoid misinformation that have been added recently and not yet
removed.
just like what pn.lizana said, "you must have a second plan" and if
possible the third and the forth.
so, wiki can be used as reference and can be included as one of the
valid sources of information.
think wisely mates.....;p
cik nana
Jun 19, 2009, 10:50:08 AM6/19/09
to lawmaniacs09
well,
i would say that wikis should be allowed as valid sources for academic
research
but we should not just rely 100% on it.
As we dont know whether the sources are completely true or not.
Plus, we need to search in other webs so than we are able to get
variety of informations from different webs, not only in wiki.
But i believe that wiki is good enough for students to do some
researches.
The editors should know whether the informations are facts or not and
is it suitable for students?
They need to filter the content from those who submit it,
or should i say, i agree with Qayyum about the 'floating resources/
references'.
Thus, wikis should be allowed as valid resources for academic
reasearch.
Thank you.
debbie
Jun 19, 2009, 11:22:36 PM6/19/09
to lawmaniacs09
In my point of view,a wiki is a good place to start to find
information for academic research so it is reliable for students to
make wikis as their source of information. Most wikis including
wikipedia push to have information cited at the bottom of the page.
You can therefore find the information you need on a wiki and then
find the original source. This allows you to not only verify the
information given to make sure it came from someplace reliable but it
also gives you a book or some other publication that contains more
information on the subject you are researching. These resources can
then be cited in academic papers unlike a wiki therefore students can
choose either to use wikis or original source to be submit to their
instructors. Wikis give students another alternatives to seek for
information.
However it is imperative that you actually find the copy of the source
material and determine
1)That it is a reliable source such as a paper in a medical journal or
a book from someone who is an authority on the subject
2) That the statement attributed to this work in this wiki is actually
contained in this reliable source.
I also find a link that you can go to learn and understand more about
wikis.
http://webtrends.about.com/od/wiki/a/what_is_a_wiki.htm
HAPPY LEARNING!!
Farez Rusman
Jun 20, 2009, 12:54:52 PM6/20/09
to lawmaniacs09
Students nowdays could find any informations using the search engine
such as 'wikipedia'. As I've been told before,wikipedia has more than
2.9 million entries in English language. I can conclude that, it is
the most popular popular education and research site on the internet.
The entries in the wikipedia are accurate, informative, comprehensive
and a great resource for students. Regarding to your question, I think
that wikis should be allowed as valid sources for academic research
for the students. We, as a student, could gain more knowledge using
the wikipedia because it usually gives all the information about the
particular article that we type in the seacrh box. What I mean is, let
say if we are looking for the article about the 'seperation of powers
in Malaysia'. After we type the article that we eager to know, all the
infos about the seperation of powers will come out such as the
constitution of the Roman Republic, Montesquieu's tripartite system
and so on. We are not only get the info about seperation of powers in
Malaysia, but we do get from the USA, Venezuela and other countries.
In my conclusion, we not only get the infos that we want, but other
infos that relevant to our particular topic.I 100% agree wikis as
valid sources for academic research. For the second question, I would
say that I would submit a paper that cites wiki as a source because in
my opinion, i believes that wikipedia is the best search engine for
academic research. Without it, I think it is hard to find some infos
that i really needed. For the last question, to gain more confidence
from the public about the wikis, I think they should always update
their infos every single day, and the editor should make corrections
if there are some mistakes in their article so that public would be
more confident to use wiks as valid sources for academic research.
such as 'wikipedia'. As I've been told before,wikipedia has more than
2.9 million entries in English language. I can conclude that, it is
the most popular popular education and research site on the internet.
The entries in the wikipedia are accurate, informative, comprehensive
and a great resource for students. Regarding to your question, I think
that wikis should be allowed as valid sources for academic research
for the students. We, as a student, could gain more knowledge using
the wikipedia because it usually gives all the information about the
particular article that we type in the seacrh box. What I mean is, let
say if we are looking for the article about the 'seperation of powers
in Malaysia'. After we type the article that we eager to know, all the
infos about the seperation of powers will come out such as the
constitution of the Roman Republic, Montesquieu's tripartite system
and so on. We are not only get the info about seperation of powers in
Malaysia, but we do get from the USA, Venezuela and other countries.
In my conclusion, we not only get the infos that we want, but other
infos that relevant to our particular topic.I 100% agree wikis as
valid sources for academic research. For the second question, I would
say that I would submit a paper that cites wiki as a source because in
my opinion, i believes that wikipedia is the best search engine for
academic research. Without it, I think it is hard to find some infos
that i really needed. For the last question, to gain more confidence
from the public about the wikis, I think they should always update
their infos every single day, and the editor should make corrections
if there are some mistakes in their article so that public would be
more confident to use wiks as valid sources for academic research.
aimi
Jun 21, 2009, 10:51:22 AM6/21/09
to lawmaniacs09
My answer to the first question is yes. I think we should allowed wiki
to be used as a valid source for academic research, and I would submit
a paper that cites wiki as a source.
This is because wiki draws upon the expertise of a large number of
people who are best in their own fields and making it a valid source
of research. Although there is a risk of its content being vandalized,
we could always overcome this by making a thorough observation and
analysis by comparing information with other sources.
One way to minimize the problem of vandalism is by using the same
approach of that is being used by the Portuguese Wikipedia. Portuguese
Wikipedia will only allow its users to have extra tools after they
have made certain number of edits to prove their trustworthiness and
usefulness as an editor.
to be used as a valid source for academic research, and I would submit
a paper that cites wiki as a source.
This is because wiki draws upon the expertise of a large number of
people who are best in their own fields and making it a valid source
of research. Although there is a risk of its content being vandalized,
we could always overcome this by making a thorough observation and
analysis by comparing information with other sources.
One way to minimize the problem of vandalism is by using the same
approach of that is being used by the Portuguese Wikipedia. Portuguese
Wikipedia will only allow its users to have extra tools after they
have made certain number of edits to prove their trustworthiness and
usefulness as an editor.
Lavender
Jun 24, 2009, 2:45:33 AM6/24/09
to lawmaniacs09
In my opinion, we may trust a wiki for academic research.
However, it doesn't mean that we have to trust it 100%.
As we know, there is no one who control the internet.
So that, it can't be deny that some of the information is true nor
false.
If we want to use wikis as sources, so, we have to double-checked the
sources that we get from other cite.
Then, we can compare it.
However, it doesn't mean that we have to trust it 100%.
As we know, there is no one who control the internet.
So that, it can't be deny that some of the information is true nor
false.
If we want to use wikis as sources, so, we have to double-checked the
sources that we get from other cite.
Then, we can compare it.
bloody_tasya
Jun 24, 2009, 3:10:21 AM6/24/09
to lawmaniacs09
raodagreat
Jun 27, 2009, 1:02:10 AM6/27/09
to lawmaniacs09
Well,we can use Wiki as our source of infos,but dont rely on it 100%
because people updated Wiki almost everyday..so,the infos might or
might not be true..we still have to refer to our books..
runiahaqita
Jul 1, 2009, 2:35:50 AM7/1/09
to lawmaniacs09
For me,we can browse to wiki to find information b'cz it also has
a lot of information. It depends on us to get information from any
other
sources besides wikis.
a lot of information. It depends on us to get information from any
other
sources besides wikis.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
zuhairah zaini
Jul 1, 2009, 3:53:00 AM7/1/09
to lawman...@googlegroups.com
in my opinion,wiki is a good source 2 find any information.we can get any information that we looking 4..ermm..it depend on how we use it..
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 3:46 PM, amira khairani <amirak...@gmail.com> wrote:
> but we also cannot denied that it also has some disadvantages..
On Jul 1, 3:17 pm, amira khairani <amirakhair...@gmail.com> wrote:
> yes.i agree with u..
> wiki is a wide source of information and we cannot denied that..
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -> > > > garner more confidence from the public?- Hide quoted text -
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
aluvp
Jul 8, 2009, 3:33:58 AM7/8/09
to lawmaniacs09
undeniable.....wiKi is valid for acaDemic research...however,,depend
on how we use it.
On Jul 1, 3:53 pm, zuhairah zaini <nonoe2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> in my opinion,wiki is a good source 2 find any information.we can get any
> information that we looking 4..ermm..it depend on how we use it..
>
on how we use it.
On Jul 1, 3:53 pm, zuhairah zaini <nonoe2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> in my opinion,wiki is a good source 2 find any information.we can get any
> information that we looking 4..ermm..it depend on how we use it..
>
boboy
Jul 15, 2009, 3:43:31 AM7/15/09
to lawmaniacs09
I should trust wikipedia because it is most popular search engine for
now. I also use wikipedia for searching any information for my
assignments. All people around the world always use it to search any
information. Wikipedia shows all the information about something that
we try to know. Celebrities,History,Cartoon,learning subjects and etc
are examples of information that we can find through this serach
engine. ARIGATO GOZAIMASU.
now. I also use wikipedia for searching any information for my
assignments. All people around the world always use it to search any
information. Wikipedia shows all the information about something that
we try to know. Celebrities,History,Cartoon,learning subjects and etc
are examples of information that we can find through this serach
engine. ARIGATO GOZAIMASU.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages