Originally Posted by Takuto

Well overall, the internet is never a realiable source. I mean my friend did a report and got most of their sources on this bogus-like site. I still use books as my only resource. They are the only ones that I can trust.

the internet can be your best resource if you know what to look for on a website to see if it's a legit site or not.

I'm pretty sure that any school worth being wouldn't allow it as a source. Most of the pages on it are allowed to be manipulated by whomever.

I don't have as much of a problem with it as most people here seem to.
Their filters for scanning through false content have gotten much better. Basically, if it's informal, you can use Wiki.
But when I want to know about something and I need fact, I will jump to verify what I'm being told.

I wouldn't much call this a debate either, it's actually quite obvious. Wikipedia can be edited and manipulated by whoever wants to.

The information you recieve could very well just be made up, and obviously not reliable. If you even thought once about using Wikipedia as a source in a college, you'd surely be laughed at by the professor.

if the artical has referance then yes it shuld be allowed

Originally Posted by neur0mancer

I believe it should.
Wikipedia has fact-checkers constantly scanning the site, as well as people who look at the pages that were most recently edited to see if the edit brings any new information to the table (or totally defaces the page)

My little brother said he edited a page, and it was back to normal in less than a minute.
It also tells you wen a citation is needed for a certain fact stated, so you don't use it because of lack of proof, and it also states references for facts that have them (which are also checked).
Wikipedia isn't as bad as everyone is making it out to be. D:

I agree with this point of view.

As far as High School papers go, Wikipedia is god.
By all means, look at other sources too, but wikipedia is usually pretty good. I get 90%+ on all of my stuff and I use Wikipedia A LOT. o_o

If you're doing a big project, make sure to double check their points to be safe, but beyond that... it's godly.

wikipedia truly isn't NOT a reliable source....I usually never use it.

wikipedia truly isn't NOT a reliable source....I usually never use it.

The reason that I don't like it is because people can just go on and edit the material...and then could put something like...Russia is in North America....it's like wha?

Wikipedia is fine as a starting point -- sometimes it will have links to external sources that're actually quite good and can lead you further in what you're supposed to be researching.

However, most articles on Wikipedia can be changed by pretty much anyone and, even though they have fact-checkers, it's still not a reliable scholarly source.

Not to mention that most of the articles on Wikipedia are fairly broad and don't cover specific enough topics for most papers. (At least, the kind that I've had to write in my lifetime.)

This isn't really much of a debate though.

No, not really.....

Anyone can enter information in there, and sure, it's okay to look at certain entries for information, since some of them have sources.

I heard from my sister that she was reading an article on some kind of thinng for her report on Wikipedia.......when at the end it said, "Hi, you are a faggot. (:"

Ehh.....yeah...pretty much. xDD

Sometimes when it's hard for me to find the right websites with information on the interwebz, I use Wikipedia..if the article I want has sources of course. (:

Also, my Social Studies teach said that "99 percent" of the articles there are opinion. Maybe not ninety-nine percent, but a high percentage.......yea. (:

I use Wikipedia for my religious reports.
But all we need is very general, common knowledge about the writer of the book/letter we're summarizing.

I like Wikipedia because it's helpful for things like looking up an anime or a movie, but I suppose it can't be taken completely seriously.

Does this mean that Wiki is wrong about the kakapo? =o

NO
NO
NO
and a thousand times
NO (Imagine it continued a thousand times)

The think with wikipedia, is that anyone can go on te hsite and edit the fourms to say whateve they want. For example, if i wanted to say that eating maccorini and cheese can kill you, i could post that. So you don't know for a sure that the site is true, not only on wikipedia, but on all sites...

As far as my experience goes, Wikipedia is usually right. I think that it should be allowed as a reliable source--- it's often one of the only sources a student might know.

However, I acknowledge that wikipedia might be wrong at times. If a student provides blatant misinformation in a paper, cited from wikipedia, that's a risk he or she should be willing to take.

It's common sense to make sure something is correct before you take it out of a source. If the student fails to do that, it doesn't make sense to penalize the rest of the students who know how to cite sources correctly.

Well, I wouldn't know how to answer the question since I don't exactly use wikipedia, I just go to google and find anything I need for school and stuff =)

As above, Wikipedia IS edited/moderated. It's not like you can write "LOL GEORGE BUSH IS GAY" and expect it to stay there for more than a nanosecond. It isn't infallible, and shouldn't be used for academic papers. That's what scholastic databases are for.

Even in high school, it's a bit iffy. If you double-check everything you use, why even put Wikipedia in your citations? Just use the books, etc., that are trustworthy.

Wikipedia can be very usefull(sometimes)
I dont like it though, i tend not to use it much, firstly the things you type in it has a bare minimum of resources.
A minute ago i typed in neurotransmitters into it and it came up with a small sentence stating they where chemicals in the brain of which i knew allready.
Som parts of it however u can only access in certain languages because people arnt clever enough to translate them.
On the whole i think wikipedia should be allowed in schools for the basis of quick knowledge, on the other hand it shouldnt be allowed because the minimalistic view points of others on given topics of which are typed in are sometimes biased and should not be allowed to be typed or used as a source.

I think wikipedia should be alloud in schools because with out it i wouldnt be doing very well in some of my subjects at the moment.

I don't believe in copying it word for word but if you can put the explanation into you own word's then why not.

While it does have accurate information some of the time, anyone can go in and alter that information as a joke or to just throw people off. I admit I've used it in research papers for school before, but it's a 50/50 shot on whether or not what you're reading is the truth or someone else's version of it.

Wikipedia is good for a digest of sorts, a source for imformation, but for citing? Ehhh... not so much. In my opinion, Wikipedia is best for gettin the jist of a subject with its main points, but you can't exactly write a paper based solely on an article on that website.

No, just like any other page, unless it has EDU in it, I won't look at it (or WORLD BOOK ONLINE or GROLIERS). Simply because any Joe Schmo can right about Vivisections in the cosmetic industry (Lame example I know.), I don't know why they would want to, but they can.

Wikipedia is good for giving you research topics, and key words, but don't take the information, I always find a second source, and usually always click the external links and footnotes.

After all, I if can edit the articles, can't anyone?

i think wikipedia could be a reliable source if they would put a little bit more information it can be more reliable because then they would have inless than like 4 pages of some information they could have about 8 pages of good information. :D

Wikipedia is a reliable source.. want to know why it is not used it schools though it's a GENERAL ENCYLOPEDIA...

Wikipedia isn't reliable enough to be used by itself. I use it with other sources, so I'm sure the info is accurate, but some of my teachers at school won't even let me use wikipedia as a source at all. You just have to be careful when using it.

I have no idea. Some information is actually reliable on wikipedia. I did a kidney project in science and only used wikipedia. I got everything right and got a perfect "A!"

Wikipedia is infallible, but that said the people who maintain the articles tend to be fierce about it, they want the information to be right, and are quick to correct any misinfo.

That said, it isn't official and it is kind of unreliable, but it is GREAT for sources. When I'm working on a research report etc, I go to wikipedia to get a general idea on the topic, and then note the references that are used for the information. It's really simple to use wikipedia to find the sources you need, and that is really how it's useful in doing research.