Research Paper On Wikipedia

Research Paper On Wikipedia
Wikipedia is a free–access, free–content Internet encyclopedia, supported and hosted by the non–profit Wikimedia Foundation. Those who can access
the site can edit most of its articles. Wikipedia is ranked among the ten most popular websites,
Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger launched Wikipedia on January 15, 2001. Sanger a portmanteau of wiki and encyclopedia. Initially only in English,
Wikipedia quickly became multilingual as it developed similar versions in other languages, which differ in content and in editing practices. The
English Wikipedia is now one of 291 Wikipedia editions and is the largest with articles . There is a grand total, including all Wikipedias, of over 38
million articles in over 250 different languages. As of February ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Wall Street Journal cited the array of rules applied to editing and disputes related to such content among the reasons for this trend. Wales disputed
these claims in 2009, denying the decline and questioning the methodology of the study. Two years later, Wales acknowledged the presence of a slight
decline, noting a decrease from "a little more than 36,000 writers" in June 2010 to 35,800 in June 2011. In July 2012, the Atlantic reported that the
number of administrators is also in decline. In the November 25, 2013, issue of New York magazine, Katherine Ward stated "Wikipedia, the
sixth–most–used website, is facing an internal crisis. In 2013, MIT's Technology Review revealed that since 2007, the site has lost a third of the
volunteer editors who update and correct the online encyclopedia's millions of pages and those still there have focused increasingly on
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Does Wikipedia Contribute To An Inevitable Source?
When it comes to the topic of Wikipedia, most of us will readily agree that you can get some valuable information from the website. Where this
agreement usually end, however, is on the question of credibility. Whereas some are convinced that the website is a waste of time, other maintains that
it can serve some purpose. Wikipedia has certain guidelines that must be met before a person can submit an article; it must have been covered in an
academic journal or in the mainstream media. This is a way to ensure that the information is accurate. There is also a person who monitors the website
to check information that is submitted. So before a person goes and dismisses the thought of using Wikipedia they should at least take a chance and see
what ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
I recently read an article written by Neil L Waters called "Why You Can't Cite Wikipedia in My Class". The comment that Neil Waters made about
how Wikipedia may lead to a citable source, is reason enough to use Wikipedia. Wikipedia itself is a website that can help with writing a paper
and not hinder it. For example, when you are looking for information on Wikipedia it bluntly tells the reader that Wikipedia is a free online
encyclopedia which will allow anyone to edit or submit an article. Wikipedia is the largest and most known websites to obtain a reference from.
Due to the fact that anyone can add what they assume is important makes the website credibility questionable. This is why most professors do not
allow it as a reference when writing a paper. Neil wrote an article about why students were not allowed to use Wikipedia in his class. He stated his
students are responsible for the accuracy of information they provide, and they cannot point to Wikipedia or any similar source that may appear in the
future to escape the consequences of errors. He even went on the further explain that Wikipedia is not an acceptable citation, even though it may lead
one to a suitable

The Pros And Cons Of Wikipedia
I.Introduction
Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia that provides collaborative modification of its content and structure directly from the web browser who is
known as Wikipedians. Everyone can create an essay or article for publication after registration on the site. However, It is no need to register before
editing essays or articles. Thousands of changes can be made every day due to constantly changing edited by many people. A new set of challenges
have been raised for educators and students when they involved in writing and critical thinking, due to the movement in culture from analog to digital
culture. The improvement in Internet changed the channels of how students to use research source content for academic writing. With wealth ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In fact, faculty behavior and perceptions could be affected by individual's personal factors, including individual's certain characteristics associated with
his or her features, professional status and past experiences. It is especially focus on the age, gender, social networking, contact with the business
sector, teaching experience and academic ranking. Among the factor mentioned above, contact with the business sector and social networking are the
most important factors in this study. Thus, the third hypothesis that I could set is perceived behavioral control has direct influence on the intention to
use Wikipedia as resource content for academic written

Wikipedia Vs Harvapedia Essay
When one searches to find reliable information on the Internet, they must keep in mind; there are very few sources published on the web that can be
trusted without looking into the background of that source itself. One of the most famous examples of this idea is the digital encyclopedia Wikipedia.
Every student has been warned to be careful of what they read on this website and take as true because of the fact that everyone is able to make edits
on the articles. Comparatively, a newer digital encyclopedia called Conservapedia claims to be the trustworthy version of Wikipedia. Even though there
are specific deference's between the encyclopedias, they still share many of the same qualities. Looking at the web articles superficially, the
encyclopedias are almost identical. From the format of the page, layout of the page, to even the logo of the website are extremely similar. Both articles
start with a general introduction of the topic, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Both articles gave the same information about polar bears are currently decreasing in size of their population and seem to be affected by pollution,
global warming, hunting, and change in environment. They also propose there has been an on going debate as to whether or not polar bears should
be considered an endangered animal. However, the reasons as to why there is a debate are different for the articles. Wikipedia, also known as the
"free" encyclopedia, did provide more information about the polar bear and also provided an extensive list of references. Although that may seem to
provide enough evidence to prove the article is trustworthy, what is taken for granted is the amount of editors of the article. According to the
information of the article, there are at least over two thousand distinct authors. It is concerning when considering the article a source because of the
amount of authors of the article.
Looking more closely to the sources of the article are also

Assess The Validity Of Wikipedia
The number one major criticism of Wikipedia is that it is not a creditable source of information. Wikipedia allows for laypersons, in addition to their
staff editors, to contribute to the information within the websites database. While the contributors may very well be reliable their identity is often
unknown; leaving the researcher unable to verify their contribution and sort out any personal bias from the writer. Wikipedia's own website states that
its not creditable because "anyone can edit the information given at any time, and although most errors are immediately fixed, some errors maintain
unnoticed." (Wikipedia: DGG, 2007)
Objectivity is defined as: "1. a state or situation in which something is based only on facts and evidence, 2. the ability to make decisions based on
facts rather than on your own personal feelings or beliefs." ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
There is some thought that it is impossible for biasness not to be introduced into research. From the selection of the research topic to the choice in
sources, an author's own personal points of view tend to get in the way. While an author may interject personal bias into their work, it does not
automatically mean that the validity of their research is jeopardized. The author must prove through the use of reliable sources that there is sufficient
evidence that their point of view is supported by fact. It is the absence of these supporting facts that draws Wikipedia into the realm of unreliability.
When comparing Wikipedia to Sociological research, in the terms of objectivity, one can see that there are similarities and differences. A similarity is
that both platforms require some sort of

A Brief History Of Wikipedia Analysis
In the article "A Brief History of Wikipedia" the author Dan Fletcher explains how Wikipedia was founded and the complications they fixed. In the
first paragraph, he was explaining how Wikipedia started with its first article on a Norwegian actress Beate Eriksen. That the article reached 3 million
entries from other people, and how impressive it was. Then he talks about how Wikipedia.com went live on Jan. 15, 2001 and how fast it made its
self–popular on the Ethernet. During the proses of popularity since Wikipedia had an issue with the Church of Scientology messing with articles so
they blocked their IP from the website, and people volunteered to monetize and fix articles that were messed with bad intentions. Later in the article,
Wikipedia

Pros And Cons Of Wikipedia
The first observation noted that there's an issue with the Wikipedia site is their home web page. The home page of the online encyclopedia has a
welcome page that boasts, "Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit" (Wikipedia, 2015). This method is in opposition of
what I would deem highly credible. Anyone could be an Eight–year–old or a person that is mentally ill. In my opinion, the open editing system is the
strength and the weakness of the website. There is the chance that the social encyclopedia's contributors may not create university level articles worthy
of citing as a primary source for an academic paper. Another issue is thatWikipedia seems to depend on the hopes that its user will apply the golden
rule that is "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." It seems Wikipedia depends on the kindness of its users and hopes that they will
post accurate ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Mills Kelly, a historian at George Mason University in Washington, D.C., encouraged his students to deceive thousands of people on the Web.
Professor Kelly encourages his student to create a hoax story about a pirate for the purpose of teaching the students about vetting the quality of their
sources. The students created a fake history blog, they created youtube videos, interviewed experts, fabricated documents, and then the students posted
statuses on facebook, twitter, and shoutwire. The students went on the Wikipedia page and created a memorial page for the pirate. Unfortunately
many were duped by the hoax. The fabricated pirate story went as far as being featured on USA Today's pop culture blog. At the end of the semester,
the professor revealed the hoax. Some applauded the Professor while many others were livid. Among the livid was Jimmy Wales, the Co–founder of
Wikipedia (Applebaum,

The Importance Of Writing An Article For Wikipedia
Wikipedia is an online resource that is visited by millions of people daily. Just about every subject on the planet is covered in this online
encyclopedia. Sooner or later, you'll probably start thinking about writing an article for Wikipedia. The fact is that there are a large number of writer's
that truly enjoy editing and writing for Wikipedia. Certainly, many writer's enjoy editing articles on the site. Perhaps, you are a writer and would like
to start writing a complete article for Wikipedia. Don't delay. Get started immediately. Wikipedia could always use fresh writing talent to extend their
reach by featuring more articles.
Writing for Wikipedia]
Wikipedia expects the writer's on the site to follow a few of their basic rules. Here are

Wikipedia Entry On Card Counting
Throughout history, human beings have more benefited from the Wikipedia than any other encyclopedias because of the conveniently accessing and
easily searching of Wikipedia. Since Wikipedia is free for anyone to look for some quick and basic information, it is widely used by students and
academics for introductory concepts. When people try to familiarize or need background information about a topic, they can search on Wikipedia to
gain some particularly useful materials even though it is not a reliable source for academic research. Indeed, I gained a basic sense of card counting
when I read the Wikipedia entry "Card counting". However, as I am going to start more in–depth research about how to count card and how to
calculate the True counts, it is not rational to adopt Wikipedia because of the imprecise content, the risk of vandalism, and thereliability of Wikipedia.
To begin with, the Wikipedia entry on "Card counting" provides a clear and comprehensive overview of card valuation concepts and methods for
those people who do not know a lot. First, it explains the basic to use card counting system: "The most common variations of card counting in
blackjack are based on statistical evidence that high cards (especially aces and 10s) benefit the player more than the dealer, while the low cards,
(especially 4s, 5s, and 6s) help the dealer while hurting the player" ("Card counting" sec. 1). Then it lists some ranking systems for card counting, such
as Hi–Lo, KO, and Zen Count,

Essay on Wikipedia as a Reliable Source
Wikipedia is a collaborative resource, which aims to be a compendium of all human knowledge. In a serious examination of Wikipedia as a credible
and valid source of information we need to place our argument within a definable framework. As I will show information has many uses, for the
purposes of this paper I will examine the use of Wikipedia for scholarly research, the kind, which I will be utilizing throughout the rest of my MBA
program. I will be evaluating Wikipedia based on the parameters set forth by Brenda Spatt. The credentials, Impartiality, style/tone, and currency of
Wikipedia will all be examined in this paper (Spatt 2011).
Its name comes from the derivatives of two words. Wiki, from "the Hawaiian word Wikiwiki meaning ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Proponents of Wikipedia might suggest that amateurs often make important contributions to fields outside of their profession. Astronomers, Bird
watchers and, Historians are often outshined by discoveries made by Amateurs. However once the discovery is made it is the professionals who then
validate and confirm that information something that doesn't happen on Wikipedia. The might also reference the unofficial policy of citing original
sources as a way of validating the information. "Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought or research"(Logan, D.W. p1)
Impartiality should be an area where Wikipedia really flourishes. With so many voices contributing to the ultimate output individual biases and
cultural perspectives would be rounded over and neutralized. One of the five pillars Wikipedians (what contributors call themselves) are expected to
follow is not sharing unpublished results or promoting their personal theories. This sounds very noble but these are amateurs, people who by
definition are passionate about a topic. If you are so passionate about a given subject that you donate you time and knowledge how can you be
impartial even if you try. "All articles in Wikipedia should be impartial in tone and content" (Logan, D.W. p2)
The elephant in the room that I haven't addressed is vandalism. In this instance vandalism refers to the act of knowingly submitting false

SOPA: Censorship's Sweetheart Essay
"Imagine a world without free knowledge." That was the quote on Wikipedia's front page on Wednesday, January 18th. . The information
–hosting
online encyclopedia shut down all of the articles and information on the website, presenting only a black screen and a stark situation to the world for a
full twenty–four hours. Why would Wikipedia, an online giant, shut down their website? The consequences are huge, a loss of much–solicited
donations to the company and advertising money. The answer is simple. What Wikipedia is trying to do is raise awareness about two bills: the Stop
Online Piracy Act and the Protect IP Act, or SOPA and PIPA (Wikipedia, "Stop Online Piracy Act, Protect IP Act"). Soon after Wikipedia, other
websites joined in the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
A good example of this is the Vocaloid community. Vocaloid is a voice
–synthesizer used to create songs that sound like a realistic human voice, with a
cute anime (Japanese cartoon) character attached. (Vocaloid Wikia, "What is VOCALOID?") In the Vocaloid community, one person might post a
song that they created. Another person, with the permission of the composer, might create a music video for it using 3D modeling data by someone
else, and post it on the same site. (Vocaloid Wikia, "MMD") When an amateur singer sees the song, they might sing it, use the instrumental provided
by the composer, the video by the artist, and their voice to create a unique collaboration. However, if SOPA and PIPA were put into practice, this
whole creative process would stop at the music video because of the copyright laws (Wikipedia, "Stop Online Piracy Act", "Protect IP Act"), and the
community irreparably damaged. In this way, SOPA and PIPA would limit creativity online. Moreover, many small, innovated sites created by single
users or a small collaboration would be taken down for such a simple thing such as not providing a link to their background image. In fact, the
official site for SOPA did not cite their background image, and if the law was put into place, their website's link would be taken down from search
engines. (Wikipedia, "Stop Online Piracy Act")
Yet, background images are not the only problem. For many users of sites such

How Does Pepperl + Fuchs Use Social Knowledge Tools?
Social Knowledge Tools
Though Pepperl+Fuchs do have a Wikipedia page; they are not fully taking advantage of Wikipedia and what it can provide. Their Wikipedia page has
all the normality's that other Wikipedia pages have such as their company history/background, the technologies that they provide, where they have
market presence, and even the different automation divisions that they provide. They are using Wikipedia to optimize their search engine existence.
Wikipedia is usually the second hit in Google search, which makes it an important tool to use when working on SEO of a business's name/website.
Pepperl+Fuchs has a link that directs viewers back to their home webpage, which suggests that they are using Wikipedia as a way of channeling ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Their LinkedIn page starts out with a nice about me section at the beginning that would give a customer a lot of knowledge about who they are and
what they do exactly. Along with this, they have a link to take you to their site and information on their industry, size, headquarters, and when they
were founded. Just like on twitter, on LinkedIn they have recent updates that allow one to click on links about recent news that takes one to their blog
on their website. One example under their recent updates section is, "Frequently Asked Questions on RFID." If one were to click on this it would take
them to Pepperl+Fuchs website where they could read an article post on their blog about questions on RFID. This would be beneficial to a consumer of
Pepperl+Fuchs that had questions about RFID or trouble using them. It seems that both Twitter and LinkedIn are reaching out to stay connected with
customers and potential customers where they can share news and information about their company. When it comes down to their strategy I feel that
are just trying to get one onto their website where they can increase their chance of getting

Cultural Bias In Wikipedia Essay
The article, "Cultural Bias in Wikipedia Content on Famous Persons," investigates if there is any cultural bias in Wikipedia biographies. The writers
started by discussing what Wikipedia is and some of the issues with it. Some of these issues include: lack of accuracy, unknown motives, uncertain
expertise, volatility, unconfirmed or lacking sources, and selective coverage biased by the specific interest of contributors. The authors decided to test
the last concern; they formed a hypothesis and tested Wikipedia in two different languages to see if there was any cultural bias. The writers chose
English and Polish. Primary English speaking countries have a different culture than the Polish speaking country (Callahan, Herring 1899 – 1900). The
writers chose to use the United States and Poland as the test cultures. They chose the United States since it was the largest English speaking country
and the country in which Wikipedia originated. They formed two research questions and two hypotheses. The questions were about the differences
between English and Polish versions of articles about famous people and if they favor local ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
These thirty people were divided into five different categories. There was a total of 60 people. Three from each country in each category. The categories
were as follows: sports, politics, music, moves, and academe/religion. The authors tested in structural and thematic content. The structural category
included elements such as entry length, presence and frequency of outlines, lists, references, et cetera. The thematic category included elements such as
favorableness of coverage, education, nationality, political ideology and controversy. All of these elements were looked at in each of the following
categories: American – English, Pole – English, American – Polish, and Pole – Polish and then compared (Callahan, Herring 1903 –

Explanation Of Using Wikipedia
Many students assume that the online, free encyclopedia, Wikipedia is a valid, authoritative and useful reference source for their scholarly work as a
student at NVCC. Many teachers say that Wikipedia is garbage and should never be used. Which is it?
In this assignment, we will be examining just how authoritative (and stable) Wikipedia (aka wiki) is. First, you will examine a specific entry from
Wikipedia and check for changes that have occurred over a period of six months, and then you will compare the information from the Wikipedia entry
with the information from an established reference source such as the Encyclopedia Britannica (EB).
Since you may have never really looked carefully at a Wikipedia entry, I want you first to look at my Explanation of Using Wikipedia before you start
this paper assignment.
For your comparison of a Wikipedia entry with the same entry in EB, you should choose a research term that is in some way relevant to the material
that you have covered in your course, and that term must be clear, focused and doable. For example, "World War II" or "The... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
That is partly what you are answering in this assignment, but I would also like to point out that a "Wikipedia" article can often be an excellent
starting point (not the end point) for research on a topic or a quick source of general information. For example, I often check Wikipedia if I am
looking for the birth or death date dates of a historical figure. I would also point out that a Wikipedia entry is especially valuable when it includes
footnotes, citations of sources and suggested sources for further information (often in the form of external links). Finally, Wikipedia can be extremely
useful on topics of relatively newer historical events. For example, in my HIS 242 (History of Russia II) course, I ask that students check the entry for
the Beslan School Hostage crisis. This is an exceptional article––although its quality varies a bit from month to

Summary Of The Rise And Decline Of Wikipedia
Wikipedia is a popular social media site that is used by people all over the world. The two articles, "The Decline of Wikipedia" by Tom Simonite and
"The Rise and Decline of an Open Collaboration System: How Wikipedia's reaction to popularity is causing its decline" by Aaron Halfacker, R. Stuart
Geiger, Jonathan Morgan, and John Riedl, both argues about the decline of popularity in Wikipedia over the years of its creation. Both of these two
articles include a recognition of the claims being made by the opposing party, facts and statistics to support their claims, and their own specific type of
language to connect to their audience. Although both readings are very convincing, the article "The Rise and Decline of an Open Collaboration System:
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Stuart Geiger, Jonathan Morgan, and John Riedl, the authors' language use and their connectivity to the audience felt more natural and appropriate.
Halfacker, Geiger, Morgan, and Riedl's article was similar to a written research paper and research papers are papers written to get a message across to
the public. They had headings that of a research paper such as the introduction, the hypothesis, methods used, discussion, results, and conclusion. Not
only that, they used complex professional language which indicated that they knew what they were talking about and that they know the worth of the
paper they are writing. "Wikipedia has changed from "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit" to "the encyclopedia that anyone who understands the
norms, socializes him or herself, dodges the impersonal wall of semi–automated rejection and still wants to voluntarily contribute his or her time and
energy can edit" (Halfacker, para. 91). This sentence was one of the few sentences that seemed the least formal, yet the tone of this sentence seems to
be formal and professional compared to the Simonite's article. In "The Decline of Wikipedia", Simonite used a formal, yet informal, language that
seemed to connect more to the audience. The article was an easy read which is important when trying to get information across to

Is Wikipedia Successful?
One of the reasons Wikipedia works so well is the fact that it is not only an online encyclopedia but how it is referenced for information. The
information found on the website has a lot of substance and facts that are useful for anyone looking up articles. It is the largest and most popular online
encyclopedia with millions of volunteer contributors and is published in hundreds of languages. Wikipedia is straightforward and simplistic in
technology to make browsing easier for novices or experienced users alike. A lot of volunteer contributors contribute to Wikipedia and the data is
constantly updated with current events. Another question would be, "Why do people write or contribute their knowledge for Wikipedia without
credit?" Since

A Stand Against Wikipedia Essay
A Stand Against Wikipedia
As Wikipedia has become more and more popular with students, some professors have become increasingly concerned about the online,
reader–produced encyclopedia. While plenty of professors have complained about the lack of accuracy or completeness of entries, and some have
discouraged or tried to bar students from using it.
"As educators, we are in the business of reducing the dissemination of misinformation," said Don Wyatt, chair of the department. "Even though
Wikipedia may have some value, particularly from the value of leading students to citable sources, it is not itself an appropriate source for citation," he
said.
The department made what Wyatt termed a consensus decision on the issue after discussing ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He stressed that the objection of the department to Wikipedia wasn't its online nature, but its unedited nature, and he said students need to be taught to
go for quality information, not just convenience.
The frustrations of Middlebury faculty members are by no means unique. Last year, Alan Liu, a professor of English at the University of California
at Santa Barbara, adopted a policy that Wikipedia "is not appropriate as the primary or sole reference for anything that is central to an argument,
complex, or controversial." Liu said that it was too early to tell what impact his policy is having. In explaining his rationale – which he shared with an
e–mail list – he wrote that he had "just read a paper about the relation between structuralism, deconstruction, and postmodernism in which every
reference was to the Wikipedia articles on those topics with no awareness that there was any need to read a primary work or even a critical work."
Wikipedia officials agree – in part – with Middlebury's history department. "That's a sensible policy," Sandra Ordonez, a spokeswoman, said in an
e–mail interview. "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. Additionally, it is generally good research practice to
cite an original source when writing a

What Is Wikipedia Inaccurate
It is an age of the online encyclopedia. Wikipedia, the largest online encyclopedia in today's world, has already changed the way people access
information to some extent. The online encyclopedia is not only just the digital edition of traditional encyclopedia but also every user of it can
contribute materials (Murgia). This collaborative modification feature of Wikipedia has already been widely accepted by many people. Every month,
Wikipedia has more than 18 billion page views on average and nearly 500 million unique visitors. (Anderson, Hitlin and Atkinson). Roughly 75,000
volunteers edit and write articles on Wikipedia every month (Cohen). However, the prosperity of the online encyclopedia has been accompanied with a
decline of traditional ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Many people claim that information on online encyclopedias such as Wikipedia may be inaccurate because the contributors are anonymous
(Seigenthaler). Many anonymous writers may lack the required academic background or related experience to write credible articles. Articles that are
written by non–academic writers may contain factual errors or unverified information. Moreover, articles that are edited by unprofessional editors may
not present the intended ideas clearly or the articles may not to be structured properly. Furthermore, the free editing also reduces the information
accuracy. Because any user can edit content, some articles may not hold a neutral point of view. Articles may contain the author's personal political
beliefs, religious beliefs and bias. Also, because every user can edit content, hackers and amoral users may use this opportunity to create false
information to deceive people. Compared with the online encyclopedia, the accuracy of traditional printed encyclopedia seems to be much higher. For
example, the articles in the encyclopedia Britannica "were written by a staff of about 100 full–time editors and more than 4,000 expert contributors"
(Simonson). Not everyone has the chance to write on the traditional printed encyclopedia; hence, the information on it is much more

Editing and the Crisis of Open Source Essay
Editing and the Crisis of Open Source
The Free Software movement that began in 1985 and the newer "open source" movement, represented a serious threat to traditional methods of
production and distribution. The idea of a non–proprietary method of cultural exchange was and is a radical departure from traditional models that
have come to restrict creativity and free exchange. In the ensuing years, there was a gradual drift away from ideas of non–proprietary toward ideas of
access to software's code level. This mirrored an evident diffusion of these "open" ideas into the cultural sphere. Open publishing, open editing, open
music, and open culture are now hip buzzwords that point toward a new cultural formation based on a more free exchange ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Wikipedia.org, an open source encyclopedia, describes this conflict of terms.
It was hoped that the usage of the newer term "open source" would eliminate such ambiguity, and would also be easier to "market" to business users
(who might mistakenly associate "free software" with anti–commericalism). Since its introduction, however, the "open source" label has been criticized
for fostering an ambiguity of a different kind: that of confusing it for mere availability of the source, rather than the freedom to use, modify, and
redistribute it.
One of the early defects of "free" software was the perceived inability to use it in for–profit ventures. Whereas the Free Software movement thinks of
the freedom of software's code to be available to all as an ethical and social imperative, open source treats it as a practical issue. Both GPL and open
source licenses can be used in for–profit ventures. "Copylefted" material must remain "free" for people to modify, but can be priced for people to buy.
With the advent of the term open source, it now appears that everything is open source, or is at least sold that way. When not applied to programming,
"open content" is used to describe a wide range of activities that have nothing to do with computer software. There is still the problem of

Top Ten Reasons Students Cannot Cite Or Rely On Wikipedia
Buddha once said, "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who has said it, not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense." Thousands of years later this is still relevant and gives an important to today's youth: don't believe everything you hear.
Today, many adolescents use websites like Google andWikipedia to help them research for any projects. They see it as a quick way to answer any
question because all they have to do is type in the question and write down what the screen tell them. Little do they know, they could be writing down
false evidence simply because they trusted the internet. Wikipedia is not appropriate for academic research because it can be edited and posted by
anyone and false information can stay on the site for months before being corrected. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
According to the article, "Top Ten Reasons Students Cannot Cite or Rely on Wikipedia" written by Mark E. Moran, an Irish student by the name
of Shane Fitzgerald posted a fake quotation on a Wikipedia article about a deceased French composer named Maurice Jarre. Later, Fitzgerald was
startled to learn that several major newspapers picked up the quote and published it in obituaries, confirming his suspicions of the questionable
ways in which journalists use websites, and Wikipedia, as a reliable source. This proves that, while the person behind the screen publishing this
article may know it is false, it can appear just as trustworthy as any other fact in the article. It also says in the article "Warming Up to the Culture of
Wikipedia" by Noam Cohen, "...many curators are suspicious of a site where anyone can create and edit an article, and where the assertions of
expertise are greeted with skepticism or, at best, a shrug." This shows that it is not only some schools that may fear inaccurate evidence, but that
museums are also skeptical of websites like

Essay about Is Wikipedia a Reliable Source
Is Wikipedia A Reliable Source
In this paper I will be discussing the debate between pro Wikipedia's Dwight Reed, and Rachel R. Wright, and con Wikipedia's Nicole Irwin, Michelle
Douglas, and Ivy Leigh. During the debate between Learning Team B members we debated over different points of views regarding Wikipedia as a
reliable source.
Debating Wikipedia
Almost everyone knows about Wikipedia. Heck, every time you use a search engine like Google, Wikipedia shows up as a source for information.
Nicole Irving on the con side of the debate started out by saying "Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, so what makes the information shared by
anyone true? If anyone can edit it then people can also edit it to be wrong. Dwight Reed ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The medium of the internet allows Wikipedia to be a valid source. Thousands/millions of editors (reviewers) make sure it stays valid and credible.
If the date was not "legally sound" why link to it? This is the same process peer reviewed sources use. They review the material for its validity. You
may say, "Well, anyone can edit an article and put invalid information." The other side of that is anyone and everyone can CORRECT an article,
also, I work with a lot of small businesses and I have shared with them that a "thief is going to steal." You all understand this phrase, if your intentions
are too bad you are going to do bad things, if an editor/reviewer is "pro–life" but he has a review a "pro–abortion" article there could be some theft
(bias) in the review. The police of potential reviewers/editors of Wikipedia articles will see this theft and in fuse justice (correct the article). Could a
poorly edited article go unnoticed? Of course, have peered reviewed articles been deemed "bad", of course. Ivy Leigh responded to Dwight Reed by
saying "it does not matter whether Google is a valid and credible search engine because it is just that a search engine. It only gives us a way to access
the information we are looking for. You stated, "If an editor/review is "pro–life" but he has a review a "pro–abortion" article there could be some theft
(bias) in the review. The police of potential reviewers/editors of Wikipedia articles will see this theft and

Is Wikipedia Reliable? Essay
Badke (2008) begins his article reminding us that Wikipedia although controversial is still the online encyclopedia of choice by 36% of the United
States population according to Pew Internet & American Life Project's findings. (As quoted by Badke, para. 1)
Even if the public likes it, though, for the most part academic circles do not. Many professors will not allow their students to use Wikipedia. These
professors think Wikipedia is trivial, untrustworthy, insulting, and too often completely incorrect. (2008, para. 4) Could this be because the university
world is jealous? It is true that true academics are the experts and if a layperson wants the facts, they are the best resource. However, because of the
zealous use of electronic ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It was not until I took a course at UNT that I realized that Wikipedia is a product of whoever wishes to write. Any time, I have consulted Wikipedia, I
have found the information on par with other sources. There is always a reference list at the end of the articles, with resources to use for further
research. My vote is for letting students use it as one resource, but not their only resource.
In her article, Murley (2010) presents different reasons to use Wikipedia to teach students how to evaluate and edit articles. She believes that she has
found Wikipedia to be a valuable source to find a link or reference to answer questions.
Wikipedia has existed since January 2001 by Jimmy Wales andLarry Sanger. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia written and edited by volunteers.
Murley states that as of March 2008, Wikipedia contained more than nine million articles, of which two million were in English. More than 75,000
contributors write in more than 250 languages. (2010, p. 594) However, any one can edit an existing article by clicking on the edit tab found at the
top of an article. Only anonymous registered users add new articles. These articles must meet Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. All references must
be verifiable and the tone must be neutral. If the article does not meet all of the criteria, Wikipedia's

Common Wikipedia Mistakes In Research
What is one of the most common Wikipedia mistakes. Well, it is something that might surprise most people. For example, you are a well–known
politician and decide to write a brief article or biography on your rise to fame. Perhaps, you are a local athlete filled with pride about your
accomplishments. Of course, you could have a new start up online and are trying to promote the business through writing an article for Wikipedia. Is
this a good idea? The fact is that there is just no way that this could be a good idea. Let's take a closer look at the reasons to avoid self promotion or
writing about yourself on Wikipedia.
Know Important Wikipedia Policies
It is amazing, the number of writers that decide a little self promotion on Wikipedia is a wonderful idea. They don't even wrestle with the pro's and
con's associated with writing about themselves. Here is something to note. Wikipedia requests that all articles are neutral. Most self promotion articles
are not neutral. It is extremely difficult to remain neutral, when writing about yourself. If you insist on writing about yourself, include completely
neutral and reliable sources for your information.
Critics ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Perhaps, you've lived a normal and quiet life, but a critic digs up information about a scandalous episode that happened years earlier. That informat6ion
could negatively affect the impression that people have about you. Remember, Wikipedia is a source of information visited by millions around the
world. The odds are that people will download the information and share it with other sources online or use that information for references about

Essay on Wikipedia and Its Credibility
Wikipedia and its Credibility
Wikipedia and its Credibility
The Wikipedia is a free, online encyclopedia that lets every individual with Internet connection write and edits its articles. Jimmy Wales and Larry
Sanger launched their creation in 2001 giving an opportunity to all willing people to work together to develop a common resource of knowledge.
Many people have different believes and ideas about Wikipedia, therefore, some tend to think of it as a credible and valid source of information, others
strongly disagree. "Since all the books and articles have been chosen for publication, each one has presumably undergone some form of selection and
review" (Spatt, 2011, "p."339–340). Unfortunately, this statement is simply not enough to ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Going straight to the source is the best way to check if the information in the article is reliable and credible.
A New Tool to Check the Quality of Articles German professor Stock created a new tool that allows checking the quality of articles posted on
Wikipedia and stated,
Wiki–Watch serves as a research tool indicating lack of sources and evaluating the reliability of every entry made, using WikiTrust's color code system
to display reputation of a text according to the reputation and number of revisions by users. Wiki–Watch analyzes every Wikipedia entry ever created in
a few seconds, checks the number of sources used in the article and the quality of editing (para. 2). Wiki–Watch uses a color codes system to check the
reputation of the article by figuring out how many times people revised the article. White color means reliable information; therefore, yellow color has
an opposite meaning. This system also checks for the credibility of the article and emphasizes individual words used in the article.
Many Editors to Correct the Errors Wikipedia counts 75,000 editors who check the articles and their content to make sure that the information is valid
and reliable. According to Schaffer (2009), the journal Nature conducted a study in 2005 and proved that Wikipedia is just as valid as any other
encyclopedia, including Britannica, keeping in mind that errors and vandalism can occur to any of them (para. 2).
Even though Wikipedia will never be

Wikipedia Content Analysis
Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia that has the freedom of a user interface to edit almost all of its contents. Currently, Wikipedia is considered
to be one of the most popular website along with a credit of being the most popular general reference work website (Ref.3&5 of web). It was
launched on January 15, 2001 by Jimmi Wales and Larry Sanger (Wiki ref). Though it was only composed of articles written in English in its initial
days, now it has included almost 292 languages which happens to have similar versions which differs in article contents and editing practices.For
example Wikipedia has currently more than 5260000 English, 111000 Hindi, 1801000 French, 1306000 Italian, and a lot many (approximately 40
million in 250 languages) ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This method significantly out performs more complex methods for the article quality assessment. In brief, the word count discrimination rule says
article with more or less than 2000 words are classified as featured or non–featured respectively. This method yielded an accuracy of 0.96 for an
unbalanced corpus. However, the value of the accuracy limit was varied for different subject articles. They were found to be less for biological sciences
and more for history. A study by Stvilia measures information quality dynamics at both macro and micro levels (ref). They have postulated seven IQ
matrices that can easily be tested on a representative Wikipedia content. They further added statistical characterization, content construction, process
metadata and social context of Wikipedia articles. The parameters include authorocity/reputation, completeness, complexities, informativeness,
consistencies, currency and

Reliability Of Wikipedia Essay
Wikipedia, throughout formal education, is often not seen as a credible source through the eyes of many professors and scholars. The idea behind
Wikipedia is that the members of the general public can add their own personal knowledge, anonymously or not. The freedom of allowing this can be
both beneficial and detrimental to how citizens consume accurate information within a society. The information that citizens of a democracy consume
correlates directly with civic engagement and participation. Through the comparative analysis of the Wikipedia article against other, current academic
literature, the article exhibits errors that include: Incomplete information, oversimplification of significant events, and bias framing of indigenous
peoples. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Credibility of Wikipedia Wikipedia is widely known amongst students and scholars as a collaborative onlineencyclopedia. On Wikipedia, visitors are
allowed to make edits, remove, or add information to already existing Wikipedia pages. In a recent case study, according to Thomas Chesney, that
only about 13% of Wikipedia pages contain any mistakes; Consequently, this notion goes to show that, while Wikipedia is often times deemed
unreliable, it is fairly accurate and credible. According to "Ways of Worldmaking in Wikipedia: Reality, Legitimacy and Collaborative Knowledge
Making.", by Fullerton et al, every Wikipedia page has a "default page", which is dedicated to "authors discussing possible issues and solutions related
to the article" (pg. 184). Fullerton then continues to mention that, while this is a default mechanism, most editors fail to use this. If more authors
utilized this mechanism then there

The Influence Of Wikipedia
People all over the world often go to Wikipedia as a quick and easy reference to their specific topic. Wikipedia has become one of the biggest online
encyclopedias; it exists in diverse languages and contains a surplus collection of articles. It gives an overview of the specific subject, linking sources
from primary and secondary reliable sources. According to "We Can't Ignore the Influence of Digital Technologies," written by Cathy N. Davidson, "
Wikipedia is not just an encyclopedia. It is a knowledge community, uniting anonymous readers all over the world who edit and correct grammar, style,
interpretations, and facts..." (1). With that in mind, this also means that even people ranging in their elementary years can contribute to the website. ...
The sources should be a reference for all of the material used in the article's sections. Determining a good article, the article should have plenty of
footnotes at the bottom or a little side number or letter indicating where the links are located after a designated word. In this case, this page does have
one missing title that the editor did not provide for us. In particular, "https://web.archive.org/20150622033825/http://www.rollingstone.com/music/lists
/100–greatest–singers–of–all–time–19691231/christina–aguilera–20101202. Archived from the original on June 22, 2015. Retrieved July 18, 2015.
Missing or empty |title= (help)" Without the title given in the link, it might discourage the credibility of the original author. If the article has more than
enough of missing links or as stated above, a title, the page is no longer considered has a good

Essay about The Debate Concerning Wikipedia: Is...
Wikipedia has been the subject of considerable debate for some time now. Some think the site is not quotable, while others argue that it is. Many
teachers do not accept Wikipedia pages as a source of information, because anybody can add information to such pages. However, this policy of
everybody being able to add has changed, and the present–day Wikipedia team works hard to prevent inaccuracies on their website. Wikipedia pages
nowadays indicate the sources of information. Moreover, Wikipedia pages are checked on inaccuracies. Furthermore, Wikipedia is more up–to–date
than any encyclopaedia in book form. Additionally, Wikipedia covers more topics than a regular encyclopaedia. Wikipedia is therefore a useful source
of information.
First ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Nowadays, a page is checked several times a day. For example, the article on London was last checked on the ninth of March at 14.12, while right
now it is the ninth of March 18.15 ("London" par 13). Additionally, a Wikipedia page can be put under Protection Mode, preventing somebody to add
inaccurate information ("Wikipedia: Protection" par 1). There are four different kinds of protection, each one to a different degree: full protection,
semi–protection, creation protection, and move protection ("Wikipedia: Protection" par 1). Moreover, according to the BBC, a survey of the
British journal Nature showed that Wikipedia is as accurate as the Encyclopaedia Britannica ("Wikipedia survives" par 1). In the survey, scientific
entries on Wikipedia as well as the Encyclopaedia Britannica were anonymously checked on errors by peer reviewers. In each encyclopaedia the
reviewers found four errors, so Wikipedia and Encyclopaedia Britannica are evenly accurate ("Wikipedia survives" par 10).
Third of all, Wikipedia can be updated more often than any encyclopaedia in book form. The main weakness of Wikipedia, the fact that anybody
can add information to a page, can be turned into its strength. Every day, newspapers, television and other media report new information in the
world. While a regular encyclopaedia in book form has to be printed all over again to add news, Wikipedia can simply be updated by one click. This
way, also recent discoveries are

Duality Of Wikipedia Essay
The site I chose to write about is Wikipedia.com. I chose Wikipedia.com because many people use the site as a guide for new research avenues,
which is at the heart of the internet's origins. The duality of Wikipedia is that while it may aid users in their research projects the content on the site
can be added and edited by almost anyone that views the page. This editing ability can lead to erroneous information being passed on to the researcher
as if it were fact. While Wikipedia is a great resource for knowledge and ideas, this information must be taken with a grain of salt.
A)The purpose of Wikipedia is to act as a global, freely accessible internet based encyclopedia. Wikipedia attempts to bring large amounts of
information from all over the world and many different subjects to once central, searchable place. While not all information ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
There is no age requirement nor is there any bias towards any one group based on region or language. The site itself has a translate feature that
allows it to be read in a vast amount of countries all over the world. It is intended to be used by everyone that is searching for knowledge about
specific topics.
C)I completely believe that Wikipedia reaches its intended audience. When searching for a specific topic using a search engine, often there will be a
link about the topic in question connected to a "wiki" page. Even though the editability of a wiki page usually disqualifies it from academic pages,
Wikipedia tends to be a major starting point for most researchers.
D)I quite often use Wikipedia for quick research topics. If I ever have a question about something I may have seen on TV or in a movie, Wikipedia is
the first place I start my search. When searching for information about school projects or a hobby, Wikipedia helps to point me in the right direction.
Even though the content can be questionable, usually there are references that can help lead me to a creditable information

Analysis Paper. Wikipedia
Launched on 15 January 2001, Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia that uses the web platform for online users to access. Boasting with over 26 million
pieces of writing in 285 languages, Wikipedia has transformed to be a giant in the field of search engines optimization technology. The open source
concept that it rides have made it cheap to access and a better choice for many online users. This is especially among the users who find it cumbersome
to follow prolonged registration processes to access information on the internet. Any search term queried on the Googleв„ў home page search engine
will definitely give a hit from the Wikipedia site, and if not present, a prompt will request the user to create a page for such a term. In this way, ... Show
In this particular article, issues have been raised for peer review. To begin with, the article appears to lack information by a way of proper
referencing from reliable sources. Secondly, it sets a bad precedence to talk of personality biographies to the living. It is to my view that any
article and especially the ones found in the Wikipedia should not have a biased or libelous view on issues. To correct this misgiving, I suggest that
a proper research be conducted in regards to Jackie Chan from renowned journalists, who may find it a pleasure to access and interview Jackie Chan
himself. In this regard, my role would fit in well as a peer reviewer rather an author or illustrator. This is partially because I possess excellent skills on
information searching, data analysis and attention to details and because it is highly unlikely for me to secure a face–to–face interview session with
Jackie Chan. However, due to the amount of time needed in background research and analysis, I would only attempt to add "Off Camera" section that
will be open for peer review and talk on the website. Wikipedia Sandbox is a platform in the Wikipedia site that offers an experimental practical
approach to editing articles in the Wikipedia. It is clearly structured with, my only proposition; to be that the summary area should be highlighted in a
different color. This can

How Is Wikipedia Reliable
Wikipedia as a Credible Source Almost anyone who is old enough to navigate a computer and have a sense of curiosity knows what Wikipedia is– a
free, online encyclopedia with hundreds of thousands of articles which anyone can edit freely. Because this site allows almost anyone to edit almost
any page, however, there is a debate surrounding it on the topic of reliability. ShouldWikipedia count as a credible source, or should it be considered
unreliable? First off, Wikipedia is considered unreliable by so many people and organizations because "anyone is allowed to be a contributer to the
website." ("Should you use Wikipedia as a credible resource?" 2015) On top of that, Wikipedia's founder, Jimmy Wales, has said on multiple occasions
in ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
However, there are others. For one, information on almost any topic can be found; and if it isn't, it can easily be added by anyone with the
necessary information. One complaint about Wikipedia is that people won't write from a "neutral point of view" as the guidelines require. This is
true. However, on any page with many people editing, this means readers get to see everyone's perspective. When you think about it that way, it
sounds a lot more reliable than the evening news... If a vandal comes and decides to delete a huge amount of text from a page and replace it with
"kittens are rotten" over and over again, what happens? Well, the developers of the site thought of that. All changes are saved in their gigantic online
database; if there is a vandal that deletes hundreds of hours of work, someone can simply press the "revert" button and, obviously, revert the page
back to an older form. As previously mentioned, Wikipedia does have guidelines. In addition to requiring a neutral point of view, these rules state that
Wikipedia is not a place to publish your own research. According to the Wikipedia guidelines on verifiability, "Wikipedia does not publish original
research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors." ("Wikipedia:Verifiability"
2018) Soon after that, the guidelines

Wikipedia is an Evolving, Online Encyclopedia Website
The online encyclopedia website, Wikipedia, provides general information varying from movies, television shows, theories, concepts and much more
information to users comprising of individuals twenty years old or younger, known as "digital natives" (Prensky, 2001). Authorship, meaning to be the
originator or writer of an idea (Oxford Dictionaries, 2014) is valued by "literate man"(McCluhan,1969) compared to that of a "digital native".
Controversy is created concerning the use of Wikipedia since "literate man" value authorship much more than a "digital native". In order for Wikipedia
to acquire legitimacy from "literate man" Wikipedia must explicitly give credit to the authors of its articles and indicate their credentials within the text.
Marshall McLuhan defines "literate man" to value visual linear systems indicating literate man prefer concepts to be explained in a less complex
and diverse way (McLuhan, 1969). Since literate man breaks down complex concepts into visual forms he is more involved in McLuhan's hot
media. Hot media refers to a medium that is individual based and relies on one sense (McLuhan, 1969). In this case, the hot media would be a
physical book or encyclopedia which is an individual medium since only one person can use a book at a time and only use one sense, being the
individual's eyes. Using a book is a literate man value because any complex ideas that come from the book can be broken down into visual parts
through the sentence. Literate man prefer

Argumentative Essay On Wikipedia
Since its creation in "2001," Wikipedia has grown to be the "largest and most popular general reference work on the internet" (Wikipedia). According
to Alexa, a company owned by Amazon which collects and distributes statistics on website traffic, Wikipedia is currently the "[sixth]" most popular
website in the United States, and the "[fifth]" most popular website worldwide (wikipedia.org Traffic Statistics). However, there are several groups of
people who argue that Wikipedia's collaborative emphasis also is its greatest flaw, as it makes the encyclopedia lack credibility, and as a result, they
believe that the site is unfit for use in an academic setting. While it is true that the anonymity of Wikipedia's editors significantly reduces the ... Show
One of the main reasons why Wikipedia is such a useful tool for students is because the information being presented on Wikipedia is constantly
evolving. Unlike traditional encyclopedias, which are meticulously written and peer–reviewed by subject experts, Wikipedia relies on a swarm of
volunteers to develop its articles, and as a result, Wikipedia articles usually are updated with the most recent and relevant information. In fact, there
are on average "10 edits per second" across the Wikipedia platform (Wikipedia:Statistics). This is further emphasized in the article, "Wikipedia: Friend,
Not Foe," by Darren Crovitz and W. Scott Smoot, who are both teachers of English at Kennesaw State University and middle school history at The
Walker School in Atlanta,

Questions On Web Filter Ui
4 RE S ULTS
We implemented the methods proposed in sec– tion 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 and made it available for a free use on our Regen Server. It can be accessed using
the link: http://regen.informatics.iupui. edu:8080/WebForBVI/index.jsp. The user in– terface looks as shown in Figure 9.
Web Filtering: We developed a generalized
Figure 9. User Interface
tool where you can enter any kind of web site's
URL and click on filter button as shown in
Figure 10, then you will get a link for Original Web Page and Filtered Web Page as shown in Figure 11. Comparison of output generated by the system
is as shown is Figure 12 (Original Page) and Figure 13 (Filtered Page).
Web Summarization: This tool also works for
Figure 10. Web Filter UI
Figure 11. Web Filter UI after clicking Filter
Button
Figure 12. Original Page
generalized web sites where you have to enter URL of the site, which first extracts the content then generates summary as well as keywords as shown
in figure 14 and 15.
BVI Reader: The results of this extension can be viewed by downloading a free chrome extension on your browser and enabling it to
Figure 13. Filtered Page

Figure 14. Web Summarization UI
Figure 15. Summarized Page
play on any generalized web sites as shown in figure 16.
BVI CSR: More information about imple– mentation details can be found at our website whose user interface looks as shown in figure

The Use Of The Media In Media Democracy And The Internet
Throughout the years, the Media has contributed to the dissemination of information that sways public opinion. Media Democracy is understood as a
group of reforms that makes the information more accessible to the society. These reforms include providing a better service of public service
broadcasting and encouraging people to participate in different types of Media by sharing their opinions (Torbert). Its main goal is to promote and
establish democratic values by providing transparent information to the communities and avoiding corruption (Torbert). Therefore, Media Democracy
uses the different platforms that compose the Media to achieve its goal. One of these different platforms is the Internet. This platform provides a huge
amount of information to the people through learning websites such as Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia created by Jimmy Wales. It uses a
Wiki software, which allows anyone to create, edit, share and copy articles. Wikipedia is run by thousands and thousands of contributors from all
around the world who write articles in many languages and post them live on the Internet. Thus, the use of the Internet in Media Democracy allows the
society to have a broad and quick access to the information through learning websites. However, the use of Wikipedia in Media Democracy reduces the
development of critical thinking skills and encourage the autodidactism making the classrooms obsolete. The principal role of Wikipedia in the
community is to

False Information On Wikipedia Essay
Wikipedia the site where users are able to change the work made by authors is not a credible source.Wikipedia does not have a way to make sure the
information users seek is fact or fiction due to the fact that it does not have any security measures to prevent users from making unauthorized changes
to information, which makes it unreliable for research.Wikipedia should not belong in the college classroom for doing research and should be banned
from the classroom for having false information.The site wikipedia is not an adequate source for students due to the liability of misleading information.
Wikipedia was put on to the internet January 15, 2001 and was designed for users to make articles without editing and monitoring. After the creation ...
Without a monitoring system any user can change true information to false information. For example if a user went online and went to a
wikipedia article that user could be able to change anything that they would want to. Then when another user visits the article there could then be
false information on wikipedia. Without a system users can change and write whatever they want to in their article and others with no limits and
causes problems when trying to sort through correct and incorrect information found in the websites. There is still a valuable use that users are
able to get out of wikipedia users just need to figure out when to use wikipedia and when to not use wikipedia. When not using for informational
research the sit wikipedia can be a great source to use. The main value that wikipedia can offer is the opinions of others which can be good to look
out when wanting a second word to help you figure bout and decide decisions. Options can be a great tool for when researching a thing to buy or just
for an out site voice to help a user decide and make a

The Impact Of Internet On The Internet
1. Introduction
Internet connectivity is a major problem in developing countries. Broadband penetration is severely limited, and access to useful information is
crippled as a result. Where there do exist means to go online, such as ADSL connections or mobile internet, the connection generally suffers from
unstable throughput and frequent outages. As a result, instant access to useful information is hampered. In an increasingly knowledge dependent
world, to be disconnected from that knowledge poses a serious drawback. Students rely on the internet for academics, sportspeople for improvements to
their game and medical professionals are increasingly turning to online portals for reference, and thus the knowledgebases on the internet contribute to
making life better. A significant contributor to this gradual integration of the internet as a reference guide into everyday life has beenWikipedia.
About Wikipedia:
Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia , is a free to use, freely modifiable Online Encyclopedia which is run by the not–for–profit Wikimedia Foundation. It
was founded by Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger in 2001. It is the most popular and most extensive reference guide on the Internet. Any Wikipedia user
has the power to create new Wikipedia articles or modify existing ones to the best of his knowledge. Though the authenticity of these articles has often
been a topic of controversy, each page is visited thousands, if not millions of times every day, and inaccuracies in the

Informative Essay On Wikipedia
Wikipedia offers limited information about my new hometown, Virginia Beach, seems accurately informative. Because the article originates from
Wikipedia my expectations were lowered because of its low credibility among scholars, professors, and students alike. However, I want to point out, a
professor from another class relies on Wikipedia articles for certain topic. Consequently, I refer to Wikipedia whenever I desire to gain a general
overview about a difficult topic or concept before conducting a thorough research.
Although I do not rely on Wikipedia as a source for gathering information for writing academic papers, the site continues being resourceful for
entertainment and selective topics. For instance, Wikipedia remains a staple source

Article Review : ' The Terror Of Tiny Town '
This semester I was able to learn many things by adopting and editing a Wikipedia page. Most composition classes would never use Wikipedia, but
in this class we were able to utilize it to learn. This semester the class was told to pick an article, and it would be theirs to edit for the rest of the
semester. My article was over the musical cult–western film called The Terror of Tiny Town, which was the only film to feature an all dwarf cast. By
adopting this Wikipedia page, I was presented with challenges that other students did not face, and they were presented with challenges that was
unique to their page. I did not have a problem keeping my edits on the page, but the article is not popular so there has not been much reaction to
the page. I had to learn how to do research over a topic that is not popular, and any information on the topic was hard to find in reliable places.
Furthermore, I learned how to do basic coding on Wikipedia, something I had no idea how to do before. After my experiences, I would suggest using
Wikipedia as a teaching tool. Editing Wikipedia can teach students how to research information and be able to put it in a place for the whole world to
see, edit, and critique.
Prior to the edits that I made on the page, there was a lot of information that was lacking. The Wikipedia page showed a list of the cast, the plot
summary, the reception, and it has the full movie available to watch, but the information given did not do the movie justice, and the page

Research Paper On Wikipedia

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Research Paper On Wikipedia

Similar to Research Paper On Wikipedia (20)

More from Megan Simmons

More from Megan Simmons (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Research Paper On Wikipedia