Wikipedia [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Wikipedia

Aloimeh
12-23-2008, 03:53 AM
What are your thoughts on wikipedia? Do you use it as a reference? For fun? As a starting point in research? Do you think it's trustworthy? Do you worry about it's editability? Do you worry that so many people are using it and that it can actually shape the direction of research?

finishingmove
12-23-2008, 04:30 AM
wikipedia is a surprisingly good source that fulfills my needs most of the time.

its.like.that
12-23-2008, 04:36 AM
It is useful. Yes. Yes. Depends. Yes. No. No.

jmf07
12-23-2008, 04:36 AM
Wikipedia is very useful and I use it mainly as a starting point and then use the links as the references.

I know from first hand experience that it is very hard to edit and get away with it.:D

Clydey
12-23-2008, 04:37 AM
What are your thoughts on wikipedia? Do you use it as a reference? For fun? As a starting point in research? Do you think it's trustworthy? Do you worry about it's editability? Do you worry that so many people are using it and that it can actually shape the direction of research?

I think it's astounding. Conventional logic tells us that it shouldn't work, yet somehow it does. All the charges of inaccuracy are blown completely out of proportion. You should check the sources, yes. However, it's not a minefield of misinformation, as some would have us believe.

betowiec
12-23-2008, 04:47 AM
what is wilkipedia?




:)

Kolya
12-23-2008, 07:00 AM
Its pretty handy.

But for uni work, it should be used as a guide.

Bascule
12-23-2008, 08:21 AM
When it was about history, I didn't find all the sources I expected to.

When I wanted to check the melting point of the lead (Pb) for the lecture, there was a wrong data at first.

So, when it's about fun or some basic informations, it's good enough. Just not good enough for the serious researches.

Stensland
12-23-2008, 08:22 AM
i love it and use it all the time. and i think it's pretty trustworthy.

Bilbo
12-23-2008, 08:41 AM
I'm using Wikipedia sometimes for researches or if I don't understand something I go there because often it is written in easier words. But using it as a reference for academic work is an absolute "no go". people at uni doesn't like to see that.

adee-gee
12-23-2008, 10:11 AM
Phenomenal site, love it.

I've got the Wikipedia application for my phone, I love just randomly searching for stuff and reading info on it. As someone suggested, it shouldn't really work, but it does.

*snowflake*
12-23-2008, 04:22 PM
Loves it!

Whenever i come upon a subject i'm not familiar with i turn to Wikipedia. It gives you a good insight on the subject. However, i don't take it all for granted, especially after that scandal they had a while back, but if you need some basic info on absolutelly anything that comes to your mind Wikipedia is a place to go.

El Legenda
12-23-2008, 04:24 PM
most professors will :lol: at your face if you use it as a source..

Clydey
12-23-2008, 04:38 PM
most professors will :lol: at your face if you use it as a source..

You'd get failed if you used it as a source, most likely. Even if it was 100% reliable, the method used to put pages together is enough to prevent it from being a citable source.

Jelena
12-23-2008, 05:03 PM
most professors will :lol: at your face if you use it as a source..
Once I wanted to state something in one of my works for uni, and I was :rolleyes: when I heard of a friend he found the fact at wikipedia. Oh well, but after a bit more research I found a quotable source for that.

MisterQ
12-23-2008, 05:08 PM
It's a wonderful starting point for research, but you must confirm the facts elsewhere if you are doing any serious sort of study. I think the academic community is correct not to accept it as a cited source, except perhaps in unusual circumstances.

Bilbo
12-23-2008, 05:14 PM
Once I wanted to state something in one of my works for uni, and I was :rolleyes: when I heard of a friend he found the fact at wikipedia.

i wonder what the prof was thinking :lol:

Jelena
12-23-2008, 05:54 PM
i wonder what the prof was thinking :lol:
I didn't quote the wiki-source, but the other source which I had found after more research and using a bit creativity.

(though I also wonder what he thought when he saw that I quoted a page of a football-club site in a work about Brazilian phonetics. :lol:)

rtgy
12-23-2008, 06:56 PM
What are your thoughts on wikipedia? Do you use it as a reference?

yes and it's very helpful to me..................;)



Do you worry that so many people are using it and that it can actually shape the direction of research?


:rolleyes: possibly.......

l_mac
12-23-2008, 11:25 PM
Why hasn't Butt Diddley posted here?

Aloimeh
12-23-2008, 11:52 PM
I've never used it for "official" purposes, but I think the attitude of academics is a bit elitist.

q.j.
12-23-2008, 11:58 PM
never for university work
how can one, it's simply not detailed enough
and although references can be usefull they are very selective, so i don't know how much of an starting point they can be

last year we had to make an article on Wikipedia-in my native language, it was serious work, it term that we got grades for it had two base supervisors and a couple of moderators that were specialized in the arias we were writing about, so i got the feeling that you can't write anything, quite the opposite they were really demanding and bitchy about everything, but i can't say that it's like that for every article out there, i only know that the history religion and the ones on politics are always the toughest ones to work with, that's what those moderators told us, and it requires multiple rechecks etc etc...

it is a big thing, Wikipedia, but as long as official academic institutions have a certain amount of restrain from it, not by not-helping it grow or be more precise, but by validating it as a source (primary more so), then it's basic informative slash starting point slash refreshing some dates, facts
function is very welcomed and positive.

Henry Chinaski
12-24-2008, 12:31 AM
depends on the topic and the political capital that can be gained from misleading people.

I'll use as a reference for a band or a footballer in other words but not say the lebanese civil war.

Clydey
12-24-2008, 12:58 AM
depends on the topic and the political capital that can be gained from misleading people.

I'll use as a reference for a band or a footballer in other words but not say the lebanese civil war.

Had a bit of fun with it in my journalism class once. We were told to find out who the editor of the Daily Mail was, among other things (I think it was that paper). Anticipating that people would check Wikipedia first, a couple of us changed the name of the editor to "Rick Astley" on the Wikipedia page. Hilarity ensued when the lecturer asked the first group what they had found out.

This was before RickRolling ruined all Rick Astley related jokes. Not as funny now, unfortunately.

Ferrero Forever
12-24-2008, 10:23 AM
We've been told that we can expect to fail at uni if wikipedia appears anywhere on our list of references. But saying that, if I'm doing something that just needs an introduction to a topic, then Wikipedia is a pretty good place to start. Just don't write that you've looked at it anywhere on your paper

Henry Chinaski
12-24-2008, 02:10 PM
Had a bit of fun with it in my journalism class once. We were told to find out who the editor of the Daily Mail was, among other things (I think it was that paper). Anticipating that people would check Wikipedia first, a couple of us changed the name of the editor to "Rick Astley" on the Wikipedia page. Hilarity ensued when the lecturer asked the first group what they had found out.

This was before RickRolling ruined all Rick Astley related jokes. Not as funny now, unfortunately.

haha. too good.

Neely
12-24-2008, 02:18 PM
Wikipedia is an awesome ressource for almost all questions or when you want to check some facts of many many areas.

I think it became more and more reliable lately, since introducing some new measures against article vandalism the control enhanced in this aspect and most articles are well written and exact.

These things along with the fact that we became a society where access to up-to-date knowledge became more and more important, these must be the main facts that some traditional written encyclopedias already surrendered and admitted "sorry, we can't compete against Wikipedia anymore".


And don't forget to donate and help Wikipedia. Remember that Wikipedia helped you, now you should help Wikipedia :yeah:


But using it as a reference for academic work is an absolute "no go". people at uni doesn't like to see that.
Exactly how I see it, no serious scientist/academic should use Wikipedia itself in his references for any written works. But it can be a first useful source as a starting point or to get a quick rudimental overview.

JolánGagó
12-24-2008, 03:46 PM
It's awesome, I luv it. It's the best source of laughter currently available, not because of its content but from watching all these idiots declaming whatever shit they happened to found there as if it was revealed truth :lol: