Respond to this posting in 125 words or more.
Save your time - order a paper!
Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlinesOrder Paper Now
In an increasingly competitive world, research is inevitable in all realms that one can think of. It follows that good research requires credible sources of information. The internet is littered with immeasurable sources of information, and a researcher or scholar needs to separate which sources would give credible and reliable information (Domininguez, 2013). A lot of questions have arisen as to whether Wikipedia is a credible and respected source of information, especially for academic research. I dare to assert that Wikipedia is not a credible source and as such should not be used for any scholarly work.
It is important to acknowledge the fact that Wikipedia is very convenient in obtaining general and quick information on an issue. It may be used where the authenticity or credibility of information is not a serious matter. In any case, Wikipedia could prove resourceful as a means of obtaining more credible sources other than itself.
Another study from Wikipedia discovered that Information provided on Wikipedia cannot be trusted as the ‘gospel truth’ (“Wikipedia,” n.d.). The first and arguably the most important reason for this is because Wikipedia’s disclaimer states that information provided on that website should not be trusted as it represents the personal views of individuals whose expertise has not been considered or proven. This shows that information provided in Wikipedia could be biased, for all you know. According to (Colbert, 2006) the number of active editors on Wikipedia has dwindled considerably, therefore the ability to critique and update information on the website has become almost impossible. It has also been noted with a lot of concern that the editors in Wikipedia have very little diversity regarding age, gender, and race.
Colbert (2006) explained users of Wikipedia might falsify entries and post information that is very untrue and misleading. This information could stay on the website for days on end without being reviewed or corrected. It is also true that the administrators on Wikipedia may erase any information which they do not concur with. In the same vein, very few editors on Wikipedia provide their real name or provide information on which they are. Therefore, if the dangerously misleading information is provided on the website, it would be difficult to hold anyone culpable. Therefore, Wikipedia should not be used as a source of information, more so where credibility is of the essence.