Question

I dont mean to have a hissy fit, but I think the number of people giving answers with reference to sources like Wikipedia and ChaCha is really crazy. We are hear to encourage learning right? Not the spread of potentially false information. The sad thing is Moderators and people with higher smartscores are giving out these terrible sources! I dont know what can be done about that, but I think there should be more encouragement towards credible and scholarly sources.

Answer 1

Can you give us some specific examples? I've found the academic aversion to wikipedia to be more religious than reasonable in the past, but I'm interested in seeing situations where our best helpers are giving out links to wikipedia where you think that isn't appropriate.

Same deal for ChaCha, though I am rather unfamiliar with ChaCha.

Answer 2

In my opinion and experience with teachers and college professors, Wikipedia is never considered a reliable source when locating information because anybody can change the information on the site. Can I provide specific instances as of right now...no. If there was a way for me to view my history of problems or something then yes I would be able to do that. But I can say there have been moderators that snapped back at me when they provided a link to wikipedia and I said that was an unreliable source and provided a good academic source in loo of. I can also say that just a few moments ago in the Geography group someone provided an answer and offered the link to a ChaCha question which I guess is just like Yahooanswers.

Answer 3

You can always view the questions you've asked and answered on your profile page. The reliability of Wikipedia is bad as a primary source and great as a starting point, basically. If people are referring to wikipedia in a context where a primary source is needed, that's definitely a problem. If they are referring to it for instructive purposes, it's about as likely to be wrong as most things on the Internet. Again, most of the aversion to wikipedia in the academic community is a blanket religious dislike because students admittedly tend to use it as a primary source, which it is not.

Next time you spot a ChaCha answer (or with the one you just mentioned), please report abuse on it so we can have a look. It sounds like that one would be a problem because it's providing a direct answer, but I want to look more when I get a chance.

Thanks!

Answer 4

Hello, yes I am one of those moderators who use wikipedia to reference what I say. This is as shadow says because it is an easy to read starting point and generally well referenced and there have been very few cases where I have found it to be wrong.

Also the primary literature is usually journal articles which the younger users both (a) struggle to read and (b) cannot access. However in saying this is if the question seems like an assignment question, not just a "home work" question or something that the asker is unsure about I will encourage them not to reference wikipedia.

Lastly 90% of the time the reason I cite wikipedia is not because I need it as a primary source its because I remember that particular fact but I prefer the syntax of wikipedia (ie. I tend to write confusing things..) and/or I just want to double check my knowledge.

Anyway I can understand why using wikipedia would annoy you, perhaps I should start citing a few better sources..

Answer 5

I only use websites from the web, when I need to show steps that aren't easly understood or the student needs to read for themselves. I will not give an website with answer only, it will have steps and how to get to the answer through these steps.

Answer 6

ChaCha is actually kinda helpful to me. IDK if a person who is super smart is answering all those questions, or its just a completely smart computer. But chacha is pretty ok...just that it gives the direct answer, when we should be helping the users on OS to find the answer them selves by showing them step by step.

Answer 7

Wikipedia is really helpful when it comes to Mathematics and in Science, specifically with Physics because a lot of the information can not be debated against. In some topics like in Theoretical Physics we do see a line of biased opinion where there are a lot of theories still being presented. For example not long ago I read about a particle that traveled faster than the speed of light then in that case referencing wikipedia is a bad idea. But for theorems that are common like quadratic formula or something like Faraday's Laws then it is ok to reference wikipedia. I have had a lot of professors in my college actually encourage us to use wikipedia as a starting point when studying. But there are a lot of other resources out there.

Answer 8

I'm neither for nor against wikipedia ... If it has concise, correct information on a particular topic, I'll quote/use it in a heartbeat when helping someone. I can understand preferring a primary source if it provides better coverage of the subject matter. However, unless a particular page cited is actually incorrect, I'm not seeing any harm in citing it while helping someone.

Sure, you never want to give someone wrong information and we should all be careful in that regard, but I can't really see faulting someone for helping someone else and pointing them at valid, correct, helpful information that assists them in understanding the solution to a question they've posed ... just because it's on a particular site.