Wikipedia Can Not Be Trusted

Wikipedia Can't Be Trusted: Assignment #2

The debate on whether Wikipedia is a creditable source of information or not is in almost all class rooms, and students and professors are on both sides of the subject. Some see Wikipedia as a valid source of information because most information is cited and the site goes through quality checks. Others think Wikipedia is not a valid source because the site has too wide scope of information and even though most articles posted are scholarly, not all are. Despite what some may say about the validity of Wikipedia, it is not credible and valid source of information.

Those who say that Wikipedia is a valid and credible source of information argue that it is so because most information is cited, and that every entry is subject to quality checks. Wikipedia has a lot of in depth information about many topics or debates. Wikipedia puts things in simple terms for people to understand. Wikipedia claims that it prohibits the use of the site to publish a person's personal views the site is an encyclopedia, and it only reports the facts (Wikipedia 2012). Another advantage of Wikipedia is a person is able to get up-to-date information compared to an encyclopedia that takes years to publish.

The scope of Wikipedia is vast, and while many articles are probably scholarly and cite credible information, that is not true for everything. People cannot trace back the information to who wrote it, or where they received their information. Also since anyone with a computer and an Internet connection can edit Wikipedia, false or biased information can be put on the site at anytime.

When editing information on Wikipedia, a person does not need to provide any information about themselves; they do not even need to give an email address. In an article "The Top 10 Reasons Students Cannot Cite or Rely On Wikipedia," the number one reason was that Wikipedia says on their site "we do not expect you to trust us," that they are not a primary source, and some articles may contain errors (Moran, 2012). Wikipedia says they do try to edit the site, but there has been a time when false information was on the site for months. The founder of Wikipedia Jimmy Wales was asked if he thought students should cite Wikipedia. His response was "No, I don't think people should cite it, and I don't think people should cite Britannica, either... People shouldn't be citing encyclopedias in the first place" (Ghajar, 2012). So even if the founder of the site does not think the information on Wikipedia is valid, how can students trust it?

Wikipedia may not be a valid source for factual information, but it can help a person who just needs to read the highlights of an event or a subject The site is organized, and it is easy to find what you are looking for. There are multiple links to articles or other sites, and the wording is very easy to