Wikipedia

Wokamuka · 05-07-2008, 08:41 PM

I, personally, believe that Wikipedia is an excellent source for a "springboard" of research. Go to Wikipedia and you will be introduced to many, many sources.

There are those who discount the value of Wikipedia. They believe, like those who believe within only faith, that Wikipedia is a faithless and, thus, non-viable source of truth.

I am not claiming that Wikipedia is the ultimate source of Truth, unlike those who cite Biblical verses and, by "honest" research values. Wikipedia is, to me, a springboard unto the Truth. By some and because, simply, I, at any time, use Wikipedia, my findings are refused.

Wikipedia is an inspiration of Democracy. Wikipedia inspires free-thinking. There are many who do not believe that Wikipedia, as a beginning source, is a horrible, horrible thing. Why? Obviously, they do not want you to THINK.

Discuss.

sequoias · 05-07-2008, 09:19 PM

Well well...I research a lot of things on wikipedia. Best of all it's free encyclopedia over the internet, even though it's not 100 percent accurate because most of the articles are edited by the viewers. They do not have their own staff to edit all this stuff, I believe.
I like to research a lot of things as well.

Boult · 05-07-2008, 09:21 PM

well....

Study: Wikipedia as accurate as Britannica - CNET News.com

Wikipedia, Britannica: A Toss-Up

Banjo · 05-07-2008, 09:27 PM

I sometimes go to Wikipedia as the starting point in order to find more sources and be led to other websites with enriched information.

jillio · 05-07-2008, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Banjo

I sometimes go to Wikipedia as the starting point in order to find more sources and be led to other websites with enriched information.

Exactly. It can be used as a starting point to locate valid resources. However, as there is no review process to protect for accuracy, and site posters do not have to demonstrate any degree of expertise in the topic which they address, it is not considered to be a valid source when one needs to support a position with credible sources.

jiro123 · 05-07-2008, 10:42 PM

I like wiki for quick look-up on popular things. But for research purpose, wiki is

Maria · 05-07-2008, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sequoias

Well well...I research a lot of things on wikipedia. Best of all it's free encyclopedia over the internet, even though it's not 100 percent accurate because most of the articles are edited by the viewers. They do not have their own staff to edit all this stuff, I believe.
I like to research a lot of things as well.

I agree. It's not always accurate, but one viewer can research other website for more general informations as well.

Wikipedia is not only just prove that it is the only ONE resource to answer all/or everything.

Banjo · 05-07-2008, 10:51 PM

Just keep in mind that you really aren't supposed to do your entire research by using just an encyclopedia either, regardless of which edition they are. They are often used as the starting point in a research. They are only there to point out the basic information and where to find them.

Boult · 05-07-2008, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiro123

I like wiki for quick look-up on popular things. But for research purpose, wiki is

Which Wiki? do you mean Wikipedia?

sequoias · 05-07-2008, 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maria

I agree. It's not always accurate, but one viewer can research other website for more general informations as well.

Wikipedia is not only just prove that it is the only ONE resource to answer all/or everything.

Yeah, can always research other sources. Wikipedia isn't the only place to research everything, lol.

jillio · 05-07-2008, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Banjo

Just keep in mind that you really aren't supposed to do your entire research by using just an encyclopedia either, regardless of which edition they are. They are often used as the starting point in a research. They are only there to point out the basic information and where to find them.

Absolutely.

Boult · 05-07-2008, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Banjo

Just keep in mind that you really aren't supposed to do your entire research by using just an encyclopedia either, regardless of which edition they are. They are often used as the starting point in a research. They are only there to point out the basic information and where to find them.

Each Wikipedia entries has citations links and external source links while a encyclopedia books has bibliographies list which you will have to visit library to find books listed in pedia book.

(not just for you but others as well )
See About Wikipedia
Wikipedia:About - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

***VamPyroX*** · 05-08-2008, 12:09 AM

I like Wikipedia. I usually go there for just about anything.

Of course, I do research from other sources. Wikipedia helps me get started with what to look for.

PowerON · 05-08-2008, 12:45 AM

I don't have money to fly and actual meet in person for an interview to find the truth about him or her. That's why there is encyclopedia online exist that provide the most information include the References selection to give actual source from book or newspaper.

jillio · 05-08-2008, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowerON

I don't have money to fly and actual meet in person for an interview to find the truth about him or her. That's why there is encyclopedia online exist that provide the most information include the References selection to give actual source from book or newspaper.

The difference is, a print encyclopedia is edited and verified. Contributions come from people who are credentialed. Not so with Wiki.

Wokamuka · 05-08-2008, 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VamPyroX

Wikipedia helps me get started with what to look for.

Wikipedia is a starting point . . . for, even, those without democracy. It's value should not ever be less than the value of oil (which is more than I can say for those within acadamia).

jillio · 05-08-2008, 01:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wokamuka

Wikipedia is a starting point . . . for, even, those without democracy. It's value should not ever be less than the value of oil (which is more than I can say for those within acadamia).

No need to ask....I know you're high!

Boult · 05-08-2008, 01:04 AM

Wikipedia:About - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia vs. paper encyclopedias
Main article: Wiki is not paper (on Wikimedia Meta-Wiki)
Wikipedia has advantages over traditional paper encyclopedias. Wikipedia has a very low "publishing" cost for adding or expanding entries and a low environmental impact, since it need never be printed. Also, Wikipedia has wikilinks instead of in-line explanations and it incorporates overview summaries (article introductions) with the extensive detail of a full article. Additionally, the editorial cycle is short. A paper encyclopedia stays the same until the next edition, whereas writers update Wikipedia at every instant, around the clock, ensuring that it stays abreast of the most recent events and scholarship.

Important....
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Boult · 05-08-2008, 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wokamuka

Wikipedia is a starting point . . . for, even, those without democracy. It's value should not ever be less than the value of oil (which is more than I can say for those within acadamia).

see my post above under "Important..."

and more simple

Wikipedia:Wikipedia is an encyclopedia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

PowerON · 05-08-2008, 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

The difference is, a print encyclopedia is edited and verified. Contributions come from people who are credentialed. Not so with Wiki.

Suppose, I have to scanning the whole information from the encyclopedia book and show to you by saying "Ah-ha! See!"

jillio · 05-08-2008, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowerON

Suppose, I have to scanning the whole information from the encyclopedia book and show to you by saying "Ah-ha! See!"

What?

PowerON · 05-08-2008, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

What?

*scratch my head*
So... do you like sweet chocolate bar?

jillio · 05-08-2008, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowerON

*scratch my head*
So... do you like sweet chocolate bar?

LOL, yes I do!

deafskeptic · 05-08-2008, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wokamuka

I, personally, believe that Wikipedia is an excellent source for a "springboard" of research. Go to Wikipedia and you will be introduced to many, many sources.

There are those who discount the value of Wikipedia. They believe, like those who believe within only faith, that Wikipedia is a faithless and, thus, non-viable source of truth.

I am not claiming that Wikipedia is the ultimate source of Truth, unlike those who cite Biblical verses and, by "honest" research values. Wikipedia is, to me, a springboard unto the Truth. By some and because, simply, I, at any time, use Wikipedia, my findings are refused.

Wikipedia is an inspiration of Democracy. Wikipedia inspires free-thinking. There are many who do not believe that Wikipedia, as a beginning source, is a horrible, horrible thing. Why? Obviously, they do not want you to THINK.

Discuss.

I find Wikipedia as a general source of information fine on an informal basis. If I were to do in depth research, I'd use other sources that are considered creditable by the scholars and experts in the field if I want to have my research taken seriously. If I were to use Wiki as a reference, it'd be to give out the general info and then branch out to in-depth studies using other sources.

Sometimes I lurk in Infidels.org though I rarely post there and wiki generally is not accepted there because it's too broad and doesn't have enough depth to discuss certain matters like the development of the Bible.

deafskeptic · 05-08-2008, 01:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

The difference is, a print encyclopedia is edited and verified. Contributions come from people who are credentialed. Not so with Wiki.

Yes, that's the most important part and I forgot to metion that in my post. That's a major reason why I'd rarely use wiki in research and I'd be careful not to use it as a single source of info.

It's why Infidels.org won't accept wiki in many of it's threads.

jiro123 · 05-08-2008, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

The difference is, a print encyclopedia is edited and verified. Contributions come from people who are credentialed. Not so with Wiki.

exactly. Remember the incident where political party and the rival were editing each other's wiki to mislead people?? I remember while back in my class, this student who used handful of wiki for citations for research paper and obviously he flunked the course.

05-07-2008, 08:41 PM	#1 (permalink)
Wokamuka 1.20.09 : end of an error Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 432	Wikipedia I, personally, believe that Wikipedia is an excellent source for a "springboard" of research. Go to Wikipedia and you will be introduced to many, many sources. There are those who discount the value of Wikipedia. They believe, like those who believe within only faith, that Wikipedia is a faithless and, thus, non-viable source of truth. I am not claiming that Wikipedia is the ultimate source of Truth, unlike those who cite Biblical verses and, by "honest" research values. Wikipedia is, to me, a springboard unto the Truth. By some and because, simply, I, at any time, use Wikipedia, my findings are refused. Wikipedia is an inspiration of Democracy. Wikipedia inspires free-thinking. There are many who do not believe that Wikipedia, as a beginning source, is a horrible, horrible thing. Why? Obviously, they do not want you to THINK. Discuss. __________________

05-07-2008, 09:19 PM	#2 (permalink)
sequoias Mt. St. Helens Eruption Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: The Evergreen State Posts: 9,814	Well well...I research a lot of things on wikipedia. Best of all it's free encyclopedia over the internet, even though it's not 100 percent accurate because most of the articles are edited by the viewers. They do not have their own staff to edit all this stuff, I believe. I like to research a lot of things as well. __________________ In memory of Socks the Irish Rat born, Feburary 2006 passed away, March 2008

05-08-2008, 12:09 AM	#13 (permalink)
*VamPyroX* bloody phreak from hell Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Hell Posts: 23,639	I like Wikipedia. I usually go there for just about anything. Of course, I do research from other sources. Wikipedia helps me get started with what to look for. __________________ Check out my city... CLICK HERE! (If you already visited yesterday, visit again today!)

05-08-2008, 12:45 AM	#14 (permalink)
PowerON Please don't click me! D: Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Would like to live at Fort Davis, TX Posts: 2,840	I don't have money to fly and actual meet in person for an interview to find the truth about him or her. That's why there is encyclopedia online exist that provide the most information include the References selection to give actual source from book or newspaper. __________________ Research before you shoot me.

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

05-07-2008, 09:27 PM	#4 (permalink)
Banjo Mr. Movie Guy Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 4,702 Blog Entries: 1	I sometimes go to Wikipedia as the starting point in order to find more sources and be led to other websites with enriched information.

05-07-2008, 10:42 PM	#6 (permalink)
jiro123 Registered User Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 374	I like wiki for quick look-up on popular things. But for research purpose, wiki is

05-07-2008, 10:51 PM	#8 (permalink)
Banjo Mr. Movie Guy Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 4,702 Blog Entries: 1	Just keep in mind that you really aren't supposed to do your entire research by using just an encyclopedia either, regardless of which edition they are. They are often used as the starting point in a research. They are only there to point out the basic information and where to find them.