Writing an Argument

Writing an Argument

This paper will be in relation to Week two's learning team debate regarding whether Wikipedia is a credible and valid source of information, and expand on my individual argument based on the debate outcome. This will include using the four steps for fairly presenting arguments identified in Ch. 9 of Writing from Sources. Last, this paper will support my individual argument by identifying criteria used to evaluate the credibility of the sources of information.

The Four Steps

Chapter 9 of Writing from Sources identifies four steps for fairly presenting arguments. These four steps include presenting both sides of the argument, providing a complete account of the argument, making sure that you and the reader understand whether the source really supports the idea that you are citing, and providing a fair presentation (Spatt, Chapter 9, 2011). It is also important that when both sides are presenting an argument, that both sides are willing to be open-minded to the facts and ideas being presented. The idea of a debate is to provide fair play, but at the same time provide an opportunity for both sides to fairly present their case.

Week Two Debate

In week two, Learning Team D was split into two parties so that each side can present their arguments for whether he or she believed that Wikipedia was a credible and valid source. In support of Wikipedia some of the supporting arguments were that Wikipedia is user-friendly, provides a list of references and citations for each article, and according to "Reliability Of Wikipedia" (2011), " A notable early study in the journal Nature suggested that in 2005, Wikipedia scientific articles came close to the level of accuracy in Encyclopedia Britannica and had a similar rate of serious errors" (para. 2). When arguing against Wikipedia, some of the arguments that came up were that anyone could post an article on Wikipedia, the articles and sources of information are not monitored, and no one verifies the accuracy of the information posted on the site.

Evaluating Credibility

Whether one is looking to research an article on Wikipedia, Google Scholar, or any other website or book, it is always important to evaluate the credibility of the author as well as the article. According to the Harnack (2000) website, there are five pieces of criteria that can be used to evaluate the credibility of a source. These criteria include authorship, publishing body, objectivity/knowledge, accuracy or verifiability, and currency. Authorship identifies who the author is, and his or her credentials. The publishing body is where the information is is stored Objectivity/knowledge asks the question- Is there evidence to support what is being stated? Accuracy or verifiability identifies if there is a direct link or reference to that source.