Week 8 – Wikipedia

Wikipedia, though a cultural mainstay, is still followed by many an opinion as to its validity. It has been taught in schools as the devil, with easily editable sources and claims, while still maintaining a place as one of most popular sites for easily accessible information. So, what really is Wikipedia and is it really that sketch?

Wikipedia is the holy grail of rabbit holes. With endless hyperlinks from page to page, holding a plethora of information allowing you to spend hours learning new things on any topic you can think of. And yes, it can be edited by the public. This does influence the credibility of the site, but there are safeguards to ensure that the information is correct or at least has a valid source to back it up.

Wikipedia’s Trustworthiness and Where to Begin

Wikipedia does its best to guarantee accurate information is available. With high controversy or highly edited pages, there is typically a lock, meaning only certain editors can access it to make changes. This verifies that someone won’t just go in and change information on the page of someone or something that is a hot button topic.

Another safeguard is admin and bots. Both work in tandem to verify edits and keep everything accurate. People can make mistakes but with other people on the lookout, mistakes can be minimized.

And one of the most important things about Wiki is it has a bibliography. Every claim made on the site should have a source attached. This allows you to navigate to the sources and double check who made the claim and where it came from. Next to a claim, there is typically a clickable number that will jump you down to the bibliography where you can see the original source of a claim. Another feature of this is a tag “better source needed” that can be seen next to claims that, as the title implies, need a better source. This can happen next to claims made when there is a conflict of interest or something else that would indicate a source may not be the most trustworthy. This, at minimum, allows you as a reader to understand when a claim might be questionable or worth verifying beyond Wiki.

Wikipedia is a great way to start research. It is not the end all be all by any means, but it is truly great place to begin. The biggest thing about using Wiki is to be responsible. There are ways to double check information and verify what you are seeing, especially before repeating it to other people. Wikipedia’s tertiary status means it is definitely not something you should cite in an official essay, but it can give you a place with condensed information and accessible primary and secondary sources that you can include in formal manners.

Conclusion

Yes, Wikipedia has its faults and is by no means the only way to do research, but that does not mean it can’t be a useful tool in your research process. It is best to keep in mind the ways that Wikipedia can have issues, so you can avoid them to the best of your ability. Remember folks, use Wikipedia responsibly!