• Easy to get to

    For quick searches and easy to understand definitions, Wikipedia can be used as a great source. But if you need a lot of details and precise information, maybe you should look at a different site. It is a great website to get the overall picture of things. It can also be translated between languages, so even if you can't read English you would be fine.,

  • It may be used if you are careful

    Wikipedia is a good source of information. Its good because you can access the information very quick. However it is wise to proceed with caution when using Wikipedia. Read what you are reading to see if it makes sense or check its sources and revision history. But do not be afraid to check other websites for information too.

  • Yes, but you've got to use you brain as well.

    The most common argument against Wikipedia is that anyone can edit it, and this is true. Wikipedia are usually quick to catch scoundrels who've put edited articles to make them say ridiculous. You've got to use your brain to pick out things like that. Apart from that, I think that Wikipedia is a reliable source and can be used as a reference.

  • Depending entirely on the intelligence of the one researching.

    Wikipedia is a reliable source when certain criteria is met. Some pages have not yet been evaluated by staff. This is where that myth, "anyone can write a wiki" derives. The majority have, however, have been, and these can be used as credible sources. If you still are unsure or doubtful regarding a fact or statistic, there is a hyperlink at the end of all of them that directs you to their source. So if a smart enough person is performing the research, they can use Wikipedia.

  • Typically Yes But I Wouldn't Use It In A Professional Context

    Just chatting, it's fine. If the person questions the reference Wikipedia has references in it itself and they can follow those and point out any problems with the references if they are so inclined. People who scoff at wikipedia typically are using it as an excuse to be lazy and not follow up on what they read.

  • For some, it's fun to mess with important data.

    Whenever I try to use Wikipedia, I quickly grow frustrated by the fact that some people delight in tampering with data. Wikipedia is just too interchangeable to be considered a credible source. In all honesty, it is just common sense that states that in order for something to truly qualify as a reference, it needs to be universally accepted. Wikipedia is not.

  • Yes, but it is 100% not reliable!

    people are able to go onto Wikipedia and change the information! I recently went on wiki to see who the PRESIDENT was and someone went on the site and wrote " the president now is Rand Paul" Well he isn't. not yet anyways and that just proves how unreliable they are. you can use Wikipedia, just find a way to back up your source!

  • No, it is not reliable enough.

    It is always essential to remember that Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, and it can be difficult to control for accuracy on all articles. For any project that requires legitimate sources, Wikipedia is not a sufficient reference. It is better to use scholarly articles or official websites.

    One option for using Wikipedia is to check on the reference list at the end of the page, then track down those original sources.

  • It can, but it shouldn't be

    Wikipedia should not be used as a reference. The information on the website is unreliable and I personally would not trust it. Anyone can go on Wikipedia and enter information or change facts. If writing something that will be graded or critiqued, Wikipedia should be avoided at all costs because it can be wrong.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.