Wikipedia Essays

work, teachers instruct the students not to use each sources that is available. From personal experiences, Wikipedia was the sources that was not true nor reliable each times used. Wikipedia is a well-known open online encyclopedia that is open for public distribution of information. Dennis Baron, an English professor and the author of “Wikipedia: Write First, Ask Questions Later,” said “Wikipedia is also the online sources whose reliability we most often question or ridicule” (705). Given such a vast

Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia accessible for anyone. The website is written collaboratively by anonymous sources; an abundant amount of people contributes to Wikipedia, which causes many people are constantly correcting Wikipedia’s information. Due to the nature of Wikipedia’s writing, Wikipedia should not be used for scholarly evidence, because there is an issue of credibility. A fundamental aspect of a scholar is to examine the reliability and credibility of any information source. Thus,

Adam T. Miller Dr. Baker English 10 31 January 2023 For years English and History teachers everywhere have told their students that Wikipedia is not a reliable source, but are they right about that? Brett Potash recites a common mantra that encapsulates the credibility of Wikipedia, "It only works in practice. In theory, it can never work". When one thinks about the concept of a website anyone can edit, the immediate assumption is that chaos will ensue, vandals will put blatantly false information

Academics in Sydney, Australia are starting to take a more serious look at Wikipedia. They've learned that students in higher education are simply not interested in the traditional way of learning and have embarked on an adventure to let their university students write and edit article on Wikipedia. This is a learning experience for the students and the lecturers at the University of Sydney. Students write articles and they look at the feedback presented by others that read their articles. This is

There's nothing more convenient than Wikipedia if you're looking for some quick information, and when the stakes are low (you need a piece of information to settle a bet with your roommate, or you want to get a basic sense of what something means before starting more in-depth research), you may get what you need from Wikipedia. In fact, some instructors may advise their students to read entries for scientific concepts on Wikipedia as a way to begin understanding those concepts. Nevertheless, when

The author of the passage Charms of Wikipedia, Nicholson Baker, talks about how far Wikipedia has come with an interesting concept. In this passage, he points out that Wikipedia is a dangerous place to rely on information where anyone can go in and edit, and essential put whatever they want, but that is what has made it thrive and grow even more to this day. However, he does so in a comedic and knowledgeable manner. Baker makes it known, and even obvious, that he has a lot of knowledge and credibility

Significance of the Study: The controlling purpose of this paper is to prove that reading Wikipedia articles has a positive impact so as to further intensify the program. This paper makes a stand that reading Wikipedia can help a lot to comprehend the point of the intensified program. Rationale: The stand of this paper is that reading Wikipedia is an efficient tool for learning. This further explains that it improves the student’s capability to be globally competitive because it requires them

Wikipedia is a great place to share your information and add to your writing credentials online. However, the site has strict rules and guideline to follow. It is important for new writers on Wikipedia to take some time to study the rules an learn to follow the guidelines very carefully. The rules are concise and should be followed. In this piece we break down the top 3 things for the new contributor to know about writing for Wikipedia. Let's take a closer look. Register It is to your advantage

Efficiently Using Wikipedia When there is a murder case, there are normally many suspects involved in this case. Quite frequently, people who are close to the one murdered are looked into. But, if someone is wrongly reported as being accused, it can damage one’s whole life. This happened to John Seigenthaler. He was wrongly accused on Wikipedia of being a murder suspect. This begs the question: is Wikipedia a reliable source? It is banned from some schools, even though that might be the wrong approach

During high school and college, whenever I was assigned to write a research paper, my professors always emphasize, “Do not use Wikipedia as your source.” I followed this rule pretty well, but I have never thought deeply into the reasons behind why shouldn’t Wikipedia be cited as a source in research papers. After today’s reading, I gained a sense about what Wikipedia is, how it operates, and more importantly why it is an invalid citation for research papers. Wikipedia’s lack of defined authorship

Wikipedia is a site that most people take advantage of on a regular basis. Generally, the site is thought a great resource for researching subjects or just to learn about special topics. However, Wikipedia has a pronounced gender bias. Most of the writers and contributors are male. Studies show that nearly 90 percent of the contributors are male. Recently, a group met in Brooklyn. They devised an edit-a-thon to discuss the Wikipedia gender gap. Their hope was to cover more women in the arts. The

a few concerns in this business case about Wikipedia. There is a small issue regarding companies being able to sell their ideas if everything on Wikipedia is “open source.” However, the main issue is that the website’s system makes it unproblematic for people to edit and put fictitious knowledge. In the business case it commented on an example where someone edited an entry about the John F. Kennedy assassination. Information that is incorrect on Wikipedia is usually changed promptly; however, most

Wikipedia is like a golden website for all the companies and organizations. This is because Wikipedia enjoys a special position in the google search engine results. Whatever you type into google, if the keyword has a Wikipedia page, it is going to come up in the top 5 search results. In order to reduce spamming and misusing this authoritative site, google updated their search engine algorithm and made all the external links that were referenced in Wikipedia page as no-follow. Thus the spammers were

Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that is a comprised of collaboration by the people who uses the site. The site can be edited and updated by the people who use it every day, this often results in the credibility of the information found on Wikipedia to be false because it is not being written by scholars in the field or hasn’t been peer reviewed. Wikipedia has an accuracy rate of about 80% when compared to other online encyclopedias that are abut 15% higher in accuracy ratings than Wikipedia.

Background: The Venus flytrap is a carnivorous plant that catches live prey in order to gain its needed nutrients. The Venus flytrap forms part of the the Droseraceae family in the Plantae kingdom .The scientific name is derived from the Latin language .The scientific name is comprised of a genus name (Dionaea) and species name (muscipula). Therefore resulting in the scientific name of Dionaea muscipula. The word Dionaea ("daughter of Dione") refers to Aphrodite the Greek goddess of love and beauty

access to answers nearly ubiquitous, it is easy to believe that situation disappears under the search bar. To agree with those who celebrate now as the age of democratized information. However, if these celebrations are justified, then why is citing Wikipedia problematic? Why did Google create Google Scholar? The information experts and non-experts can access is still different. The listicle and the academic journal article are epitomes of their respective situations: acidemia and populous media. Therefore

Three-Toed Sloth The three-toed sloth is a native of the rainforest canopies of Central and South America. There are three species of three-toed sloths: the pale-throated sloth, brown-throated sloth, pygmy three-toed sloth, and the maned sloth. The three-toed sloth is a member of the Bradypus and the Bradypodiate family. The three-toed sloth is also a folivore mammal, meaning they eat exclusively leaves. Because of their diet sloths are low on the trophic levels of their ecosystem. And they require

Imtiaz Dharker’s “Blessing” tells the story a slum in India plagued by drought. Coming from the third person, it captures the bleak circumstances and conditions of those who live in the slum. It expresses ideas of hopelessness and it appears to pity those affected by these conditions. The poem suggests that the people in the slum have been affected by the lack water for quite some time and then are suddenly “blessed” by the presence of water. Being narrated this way, causes the poem to carry the

agonistic. These are the most interesting and important processes to me, and they also fit in well with the edits I made to my article. I can connect sustaining processes to the fact that Wikipedia edits are made less than once per minute, and agonistic processes to controversial conflicts of interest in the history of Wikipedia. II.1. Definitions of two social process types The first social process, sustaining, can be defined as a process that “maintains social order and reduces variance in conditions, behaviors

Wikipedia continues to draw controversy because its open source model of production is at odds with hundreds of years of traditional encylopedia creation (Hartelius, 2010). Historically encyclopaedias were created for the public in a top down process involving