[Web4lib] Problems with Wikipedia

[Michael McCulley]

Meredith,

Good points, but your note is why I caution students and patrons *not* to
rely on Wikipedia as a "quality" source. I didn't see the notes on the list
as "demonizing" Wikipedia, but pointing out an error; and bringing to this
group's attention erroneous information.

Despite good efforts by the "user" community, it remains unreliable as a
source of information - for the most part. It's good for finding quick
information about new topics uncovered by other encyclopedia sources -
granted; it's one of it's strengths. I often use it for new topics, Web or
Internet related items, but mostly to find good links to other sources.

There are a tremendous number of Wikipedia backers and supporters, all hail
to them; but, for the majority of librarians, it should be approached with a
professionalism that requires the information be considered "suspect." The
reason: anyone can change anything in Wikipedia at any time; it doesn't
matter how quick the information is "fixed;" the community who build
Wikipedia need to address this somehow (locking "verified" information
items), but until this is resolved, I stand by my position.

I'm one of those who urge caveats with Wikipedia, as you can see from my
blog entries on this topic.

Best,
Michael

-- 
P. Michael McCulley aka DrWeb
mailto:drweb at san.rr.com
San Diego, CA 
http://drweb.typepad.com/

Quote of the Moment:
 We find the defendant innocent by reason of being generally clueless.
Thursday, January 04, 2007 3:30:21 PM 
 
>-----Original Message-----
>From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org 
>[mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Meredith Farkas
>Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 2:55 PM
>To: web4lib at webjunction.org
>Subject: Re: [Web4lib] Problems with Wikipedia
>
>Andrzej,
>
>I would hope that you would caution your students to be critical of
>everything they read. The Wikipedia is far more trustworthy than most
>Websites for the simple fact that anyone who is knowledgeable 
>about a topic
>can come in and fix inaccuracies. Any idiot can create a 
>Website that makes
>opinion and untruths look like fact and I would bet that many of your
>students are happy to cite facts from anything they can find 
>on their topic
>online. Librarians (and I'm not just pointing the finger at 
>you Andrzej)
>should stop demonizing specific Websites and should be more 
>concerned with
>students knowing how to distinguish between a quality source 
>and something
>that should not be cited in a paper.
>
>Meredith