Credibility of Wikipedia
Week 12 – Learning Portfolio item 1 – Q2
We’ve all performed a sneaky Wikipedia copy and paste at least once in our lives for a late assignment but this doesn’t necessarily mean that it is a credible source. In fact, it isn’t. The appeal of huge amounts of sophisticated sounding information is enough to deter us from the idea of whether the information that we are using is reliable.
Academically, Wikipedia should not be used. The main problem with Wikipedia is mainly the reliability of the information. (Ollig, 2007) Explains that the information which is given to the public, has no independent or credible confirmation.
Furthermore, using information from Wikipedia does not benefit the student as he or she needs to be able to think independently. Taking information from Wikipedia not only limits this but can also be interpreted as a form of plagiarism. However, like I previously mentioned, the attraction of Wikipedia can be irresistible. Therefore, when students see the information on Wikipedia they instantly accept no alternative but to use Wikipedia. This is because they are pleased with the information they collected because it sounds professional and reliably “credible”.
The information that is collected could be biased or incomplete. Wikipedia has also admitted that very rarely its information can be accessed. But if accessed it can edited by anyone who uses an internet connection (Ollig, 2007) Meaning that the information that be changed from fact to fiction. Some writes don’t cite the sources they have collected, so the credibility of the information can be often affected.
Ollig, M. (2007). The pros and cons of Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://www.helium.com/items/739484-the-pros-and-cons-of-wikipedia