Usage of Wikipedia by Students

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.