Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In plain English, my question is: Why is Wikipedia not accepted as a source? This is the simple reason, as people claim: Wikipedia is a community-made up; farmers bring in their fruits and vegetables, chefs and the women tend to it, and the kids bring water and other ingredients. Then, the village jerk comes and defecates in the soup.
To answer this question, some great people have written some explanations and arguments on this page. Everybody should use Wikipedia, either as a source or, if you find deficiencies, as a medium you can make contributions. For comparison, see also Wikipedia: Why Wikipedia is not so great, and Wikipedia: Replies to common objections. You can ...
An exception to this is when Wikipedia is being discussed in an article, which may cite an article, guideline, discussion, statistic or other content from Wikipedia or a sister project as a primary source to support a statement about Wikipedia (while avoiding undue emphasis on Wikipedia's role or views and inappropriate self-referencing).
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.
Fact-checking of Wikipedia is the process through which Wikipedia editors perform fact-checking of content published in Wikipedia, while fact-checking using Wikipedia is the use of Wikipedia for fact-checking other publications. The broader topic of fact checking in the context of Wikipedia also includes the cultural discussion of the place of ...
Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and millions already have. Wikipedia's purpose is to benefit readers by presenting information on all branches of knowledge. Hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation, Wikipedia consists of freely editable content, with articles that usually contain numerous links guiding readers to more ...
Not least in articles about Why Wikipedia is not so great which by no means reflect all the Wikipedia:Criticisms that qualified people have levied on it. Similarly, fanatical or ignorant users adhering to generally good rules to Wikipedia:avoid self-references and Wikipedia:Redirects have failed to recognize the few places where these are in ...
See also why Wikipedia is so great. Learning to write in a neutral point of view is a useful intellectual exercise, since it requires cultivating humility and respect for the views of others. Wikipedia is a remarkable phenomenon of social organization; learning how things work here provides valuable lessons for many other kinds of organizations.