Usage of Wikipedia by Students
Most colleges do not allow students to cite Wikipedia in their papers because it is a sum of public human knowledge, and not a guaranteed reliable source. The idea behind Wikipedia is the “wisdom of crowds,” meaning that even if a couple of people wrote false information in the encyclopedia, the majority of other’s wisdom would correct their mistakes. Unfortunately though, the mistakes are not always corrected and can go unnoticed, leaving false information in this encyclopedia. Colleges aren’t accepting of false information being cited, and therefore cannot trust Wikipedia’s articles. There are people who disagree with this though, and believe students should be able to cite Wikipedia as a source. It is a more convenient go-to site, and can alleviate the frustrations that come along with research. In this essay I will explain the reasons why students should not cite Wikipedia, and discuss the opposing view point that they should be able to cite it as well.
Not many would argue against the statement that Wikipedia is not 100% accurate. Even Sandra Ordonez, a spokesperson from Wikipedia said, “"Wikipedia is the ideal place to start your research and get a global picture of a topic, however, it is not an authoritative source. In fact, we recommend that students check the facts they find in Wikipedia against other sources.” Wikipedia officials agree with the decision to not let students use their encyclopedia as a source, there is no denying the chance of inaccuracy when using it. Another argument against Wiki is that any person at any time can write an article for it. There is no experience or knowledge of the subject necessary, and the writer remains anonymous. This makes it very difficult to track the editor of the article, as seen in the John Seigenthaler case. In his Wikipedia biography, Seigenthaler was wrongly accused of having a role in the assassinations of both John F. Kennedy and Robert F. Kennedy. This is an example of how Wikipedia can be used nastily. It has the potential to alter history, which makes it unacceptable to be used by students.
Those who are for the usage of Wikipedia by students argue that it provides an impressive overview of many different subjects, making it a very appealing option. Research can be extremely time consuming and baffling, but with this easy to use encyclopedia, the task becomes much more manageable. They also reason that the accuracy of Wikipedia is comparable to other encyclopedias, like the Encyclopedia Britannica. Nature, the international journal of weekly science, reported that, “The accuracy of science in Wikipedia is surprisingly good: the number of errors in a typical Wikipedia science article is not substantially more than in Encyclopaedia Britannica, often considered the gold-standard entry-level reference work.” If Wikipedia is as accurate as other encyclopedias, why not be able to use it? The idea of Wikipedia is that with time and editing, the article will eventually become accurate. The official policy says, “Those who edit in good faith, show civility, seek consensus, and work towards the goal of creating an impartial encyclopedia, should find a welcoming environment.” Wikipedia supporters believe we should be able to trust our fellows wisdom, and that the mistakes will become less and less with editing.
In conclusion, there are clearly two opposing views on the use of Wikipedia; one side believing it cannot be used confidently, and the other believing it is a reliable source. Currently, the majority of students are not allowed to cite Wikipedia, for the risk of unreliable information is too great. Evidently when using Wikipedia there is a high chance of you jeopardizing the accuracy of your research, a risk that many students aren’t willing to take. Yet, if Wikipedia were to become more efficient in their ability to find the false information, I believe it could be used as a good source. There are obvious improvements that need to be made to this encyclopedia, but with more through editing of the Wikipedia team themselves, it could become a useful researching tool.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Friday, March 5, 2010
The Reality of Problems
Many people are uncomfortable with the idea that not all problems have a single solution. This is because people can be very close-minded towards other’s ideas and solutions, and have the attitude of “My way is the only way!” Choosing to have that adamant mindset can start aggressive debates. People desire to have concrete answers and solutions to life’s questions, and frustration occurs when they are thwarted from accomplishing this. Abortion is an example of a debate that has no single solution. In the next three paragraphs I will explain the two opposing side’s view points on abortion, and how even though a single solution is desired, the reality is one will never be concluded.
People who are anti-abortion argue that life begins at conception, and abortion is the act of taking life. Sarah Palin, an avid supporter of pro-life, wrote , “I believe that no matter what mistakes we make as a society, we cannot condone ending an innocent’s life.” Pro-lifers believe that a constitutional amendment should be passed that gives equal protection to all living humans, including the unborn. Another argument of people who are against abortion is that even in cases of rape, abortion should still not be available. While rape is a terrible and cruel crime, the innocent unborn should not be punished for the criminal’s actions. Rebecca Kiessling, a Pro-Life speaker, was the product of rape and points out how insulting it is to have someone believe her mother should have had the right to abort her. She says, “It’s like saying, if I had my way, you’d be dead right now.” Pro-Lifers believe that there is no excuse for abortion, and it is murder, regardless of the circumstances. According to the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient). Statistics like this anger those who are against abortion.
Those who are for abortion argue that women should have the freedom to choose whether they wish to continue or terminate their pregnancy. Dr. Kenneth Conklin writes that,"A woman should have an absolute right to choose what happens to her own body, provided she pays for her choice with her own money and her own pain." It is the civil right of a women to choose what she wants to do with her body. Pro-Choice advocate Hilary Clinton said, “But for me, it is also not only about a potential life; it is about the other lives involved. And, therefore, I have concluded, after great concern and searching my own mind and heart over many years, that our task should be in this pluralistic, diverse life of ours in this nation that individuals must be entrusted to make this profound decision, because the alternative would be such an intrusion of government authority that it would be very difficult to sustain in our kind of open society.” People who are for abortion especially insist that in cases of rape, and potential harm to the mother, abortion should be an option. A women has rights to her on body, and can decide if she wants to put her body through the pains of pregnancy.
Both sides of abortion, Pro-Life and Pro-Choice, have legitimate opinions on this issue. Unfortunately, there will never be an obvious solution to this dilemma, for it is an issue of individual judgment. Our desire to have concrete answers to our problems often results in uncomfortable feelings when we are presented another viewpoint. The reality is, however, that there are some questions in life that we will not all be in agreement on no matter how much one single solution is desired.
Many people are uncomfortable with the idea that not all problems have a single solution. This is because people can be very close-minded towards other’s ideas and solutions, and have the attitude of “My way is the only way!” Choosing to have that adamant mindset can start aggressive debates. People desire to have concrete answers and solutions to life’s questions, and frustration occurs when they are thwarted from accomplishing this. Abortion is an example of a debate that has no single solution. In the next three paragraphs I will explain the two opposing side’s view points on abortion, and how even though a single solution is desired, the reality is one will never be concluded.
People who are anti-abortion argue that life begins at conception, and abortion is the act of taking life. Sarah Palin, an avid supporter of pro-life, wrote , “I believe that no matter what mistakes we make as a society, we cannot condone ending an innocent’s life.” Pro-lifers believe that a constitutional amendment should be passed that gives equal protection to all living humans, including the unborn. Another argument of people who are against abortion is that even in cases of rape, abortion should still not be available. While rape is a terrible and cruel crime, the innocent unborn should not be punished for the criminal’s actions. Rebecca Kiessling, a Pro-Life speaker, was the product of rape and points out how insulting it is to have someone believe her mother should have had the right to abort her. She says, “It’s like saying, if I had my way, you’d be dead right now.” Pro-Lifers believe that there is no excuse for abortion, and it is murder, regardless of the circumstances. According to the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient). Statistics like this anger those who are against abortion.
Those who are for abortion argue that women should have the freedom to choose whether they wish to continue or terminate their pregnancy. Dr. Kenneth Conklin writes that,"A woman should have an absolute right to choose what happens to her own body, provided she pays for her choice with her own money and her own pain." It is the civil right of a women to choose what she wants to do with her body. Pro-Choice advocate Hilary Clinton said, “But for me, it is also not only about a potential life; it is about the other lives involved. And, therefore, I have concluded, after great concern and searching my own mind and heart over many years, that our task should be in this pluralistic, diverse life of ours in this nation that individuals must be entrusted to make this profound decision, because the alternative would be such an intrusion of government authority that it would be very difficult to sustain in our kind of open society.” People who are for abortion especially insist that in cases of rape, and potential harm to the mother, abortion should be an option. A women has rights to her on body, and can decide if she wants to put her body through the pains of pregnancy.
Both sides of abortion, Pro-Life and Pro-Choice, have legitimate opinions on this issue. Unfortunately, there will never be an obvious solution to this dilemma, for it is an issue of individual judgment. Our desire to have concrete answers to our problems often results in uncomfortable feelings when we are presented another viewpoint. The reality is, however, that there are some questions in life that we will not all be in agreement on no matter how much one single solution is desired.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)