enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a reliable source - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not...

    Wikipedia is not a reliable source for citations elsewhere on Wikipedia, or as a source for copying or translating content. As a user-generated source , it can be edited by anyone at any time, and any information it contains at a particular time could be vandalism , a work in progress , or simply incorrect.

  3. Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_Wikipedia

    Wikipedia:Wikipedia is a tertiary source – describes how Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and as such Wikipedia is a tertiary source. References ^ Bould, Dylan M., et al., References that anyone can edit: review of Wikipedia citations in peer reviewed health science literature , 2014, British Medical Journal , 6 March 2014, 348 DOI , online from BMJ

  4. Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid on discussion pages - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arguments_to...

    A page simply defining the word useful would be useful, but is not included because Wikipedia is not a dictionary (we have Wiktionary for that). A guide to the best restaurants in Paris would be useful, but is not included because Wikipedia is not a travel guide (there is a Wikivoyage for that). Usefulness is a subjective judgment and should be ...

  5. Reliability of Wikipedia - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia

    A 2006 review of Wikipedia by Library Journal, using a panel of librarians, "the toughest critics of reference materials, whatever their format", asked "long standing reviewers" to evaluate three areas of Wikipedia (popular culture, current affairs, and science), and concluded: "While there are still reasons to proceed with caution when using a ...

  6. Wikipedia:Wikipedia is failing - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_failing

    It is often said that Wikipedia is not reliable as an academic source, but it is a "good starting point" or a "good academic reference." These assertions seem self-contradictory. A good starting point for what? A good starting point for research would be a collection of good sources, something which Wikipedia does not currently necessarily provide.

  7. Wikipedia:Wikipedia as a Citable Source - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_as_a...

    Research papers, particularly the one research paper students write in their eleventh grade, have always been an integral part of high school education [4].They stress the need to verify information and teach students how to evaluate sources critically, and as a result, teachers have developed various criteria to help students identify credible sources, an especially important skill in the ...

  8. Wikipedia:Academic use - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Academic_use

    Wikipedia is not a reliable source for academic writing or research. Wikipedia is increasingly used by people in the academic community, from first-year students to distinguished professors, as an easily accessible tertiary source for information about anything and everything and as a quick "ready reference", to get a sense of a concept or idea.

  9. Criticism of Wikipedia - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Wikipedia

    The 2014 edition of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's official student handbook, Academic Integrity at MIT, informs students that Wikipedia is not a reliable academic source, stating, "the bibliography published at the end of the Wikipedia entry may point you to potential sources. However, do not assume that these sources are reliable ...