School and Wikipedia

[Azel]

Do you think Wikipedia should be allowed to be used for school projects or just school research or do you think it should be banned?

I think it should be allowed to be used for school research and projects as it does seem credible and a vast amount of information. At the same time it could be edited very easily and is not an entirely educational site.

[-Kitsune-]

Yeah I think it should be allowed in schools, even though there is a risk that inappropriate content can be looked up on Wiki even with a school Firewall. I use Wikipedia for a lot of my history projects on the school computers because its easier to type someones name in the search bar than having to look it up in the index of a history book -.-

Even though it can be edited by anyone, incorrect information is usually corrected quickly due to all the people that pass through Wiki. So it's a fairly credible source of information, especially school-related information.

[Aizmov]

Wikipedia helped me a lot, in projects, research, learning, and even entertainment.
Wikipedia shalt never be banned! Information and knowledge should be free for all!

[Antares]

Yeah I think it should be allowed in schools, even though there is a risk that inappropriate content can be looked up on Wiki even with a school Firewall. I use Wikipedia for a lot of my history projects on the school computers because its easier to type someones name in the search bar than having to look it up in the index of a history book -.-

Even though it can be edited by anyone, incorrect information is usually corrected quickly due to all the people that pass through Wiki. So it's a fairly credible source of information, especially school-related information.

I agree. Plus, if you're doing a school report, it's always recommended to have more than one source, that way you can notice the incorrect information. Personally, I always use it as my first source to check definitions and then look elsewhere.

[Hideki Motosuwa.]

Wikipedia should be aloud, but it shouldn't be heavily used, nor should it be your only source of information(though they do have references and cites). People should always remember that the relevance is not alyways 100% and not all information is correct. Example: Bruce Lee bio. I use it to learn, but not to make people think I'm smart, because I wouldn't want to speak like I know something, giving some unsubstantiated information away, and being corrected for it. And it's okay to use it for school projects and reports, because the teachers in my school don't know.

[Ryth]

Wikipedia is a perfect site, my school completely discredits it, but its not like anyone can have permanent info there. The site is very quick to catch things that don't belong (its like magic they're so fast) and often require sources for the information being added to stay there. It's just as good as any other site.

[Tsuna Kadiri]

I think it should be considered a credible source. Granted it shouldn't be the only source you use. In December, I had a 15-20 page report I had to do for History. We weren't allowed to use Wikipedia, which was tougher than I imagined. Pretty much every piece of information I researched, redirected to Wikipedia. And quite a few times it was the only site I could find that had the answers I was looking for.

Even though Wikipedia has citations at the bottom of the page, it's a hassle to go through them, and often times the websites they cite don't even have the information on them.

[Setosan]

It's banned in my school, but it doesn't matter to me. When it wasn't blocked, I changed the description of A Raisin In The Sun to "A really bad book about poor black people"

It was funny.

[sa5m]

I don't know, Wiki is checked but there will still be incorrections in it. But who's to say other "credible" sites don't have incorrections in it either?

Since Wiki is banned at my school, I only use it to get ideas, like for English papers. I like how Wiki is so detailed; its ideas really help to flesh out my papers.

[Aizmov]

You guys go to weird schools. In my school our teachers don't mind Wikipedia and some of them use it on a daily basis
Wikipedia has some bad articles, not denying that, but their are loads and loads of excellence in article writing. There are a lot of reliable and credible articles that I wont even think of questioning, then there is www.uncyclopedia.org

[███]

I think you guys are asking the wrong questions here, it shouldn't be whether or not it should be banned. It should be, why bother going to school when we have Wikipedia?

[Daenerys]

Wikipedia is not a valid source of information. For school projects, or general factual information.

It tries, but with many users being able to edit information as they see fit, it often becomes fiction instead of fact.

[Buruku]

Wiki is great for summarizing things. Like, if I just want to know the real important, to-the-point, stuff quickly than I go to wikipedia. So yeah, I think it can be used as a source, but never the main or whole source.

[Ashminigun]

In Primary and Secondary level of education, using Wikipedia as source of references in school research and projects is acceptable since the level of learning in that group requires moderate researching (although most of the time, they just "copy and paste" the whole article and just do some touch-up here and here). However, using credible sources like books and websites set up by the authority of the field (academic organisation, instution etc) are recommended since Wikipedia quoted from these sources.

In Tertiary level of education, I think it's not recommended to use Wikipeda as your main source reference in your coursework report or in your final dissertation/thesis. I guess most Universities and Colleges have policies against students using it as their main source of references in their project/dissertation/thesis. This because the contents in the website (Wikipeda) can be edit freely both by the academia and non-academia, thus making it less credible and always changing/updated without going through proper channel (although I think Wikipedia has procedures for a user to create/edit topic). It also tend the user to plagarism since most of information needed by the user is already there but only the general info. Therefore, he/she just 'reproduce' the findings on a topic in his/her report quoting and minimum modification from Wiki.

In my personal experience, I'll use Wiki when I need to know generally about the topic and then do some follow-up on the information around the net or related books. I haven't have the chance to use Wiki when I was in school since it was invented when I was in the University. Therefore, Wikipedia is good tool for my school research if it have invented then.

[Sanosuke23]

If you're too lazy to read a book, Wikipedia being an unacceptable source for school projects is the least of your worries.

At least, AT LEAST, read the cited websites/books from the wikipedia article. If they don't match up with the info on wikipedia, then obviously wiki is wrong and you shouldn't have been there in the first place.

It's okay for the major historical stuff if you wanna get the gist of it, but for the bibliographable(new word!=D) facts hit up the ol' Encyclopedia Britannica or something.

[Ashminigun]

It's okay for the major historical stuff if you wanna get the gist of it, but for the bibliographable(new word!=D) facts hit up the ol' Encyclopedia Britannica or something.

Yes, those thick, dust-covered, hard-covered binded paper is always the the best source of information even though most of the facts are pretty out-dated. Mine have 22 volumes of those old World Encyclopedia and Encyclopedia Britannica sitting the shelves in my bedroom.

Those good ol' days...

[Sanosuke23]

Yes, those thick, dust-covered, hard-covered binded paper is always the the best source of information even though most of the facts are pretty out-dated. Mine have 22 volumes of those old World Encyclopedia and Encyclopedia Britannica sitting the shelves in my bedroom.

Those good ol' days...

You... ARE aware they update yearly, and now come in handy Compact/Digital Versatile Disk format, right?

[Ashminigun]

I'm well AWARE of that, but it seems Wikipedia is more popular than those digital version of the hard-cover ol' timer these days. >_>

[Sanosuke23]

I'm well AWARE of that, but it seems Wikipedia is more popular than those digital version of the hard-cover ol' timer these days. >_>

Yeah, it's popular because it's free and any noob can go there and make a concise, informative page about their favorite Pokémon.

Meanwhile, you often have to pay for things like fact-checking and reliability, which twelve-year olds don't wanna pay for because it doesn't come in the color "shiny."

[Momokachan]

Frankly, since my high school invests close to $500 a year in online research programs that are definitely credible, I use them. None of my teachers accept Wikipedia as a source.

Due to the fact that any moron with an unbanned IP address can edit Wikipedia, I only use it for anime, game and movie information.

[CapnJack]

Considering nobody can really tell which info on Wikipedia is accurate, which is not, or which has been corrected, if schools dont ban it, they are most likely going to put serious restrictions on its use. Like they might request that any information used from Wikipedia come from a preselected list of acceptable secondary websites. Meaning if the page on Wikipedia doesnt give a viable reference site or that site is as questionable as Wiki itself, then it cant be used.

[Acnologia]

Its banned in my school.
But I think it should be allowed, its referenced and everything, stupid school. :<

[demonplight]

Wikipedia should be aloud, but it shouldn't be heavily used, nor should it be your only source of information(though they do have references and cites). People should always remember that the relevance is not alyways 100% and not all information is correct. Example: Bruce Lee bio. I use it to learn, but not to make people think I'm smart, because I wouldn't want to speak like I know something, giving some unsubstantiated information away, and being corrected for it. And it's okay to use it for school projects and reports, because the teachers in my school don't know.

At my school you can use it, but it cannot be your only source.
Also as much as I do love it, it tends to be skewed. I would say use it as a starting point. gather an idea of what you are doing then go from there. If nothing else use it references.
Also there have been studies on the information on Wikipedia, in some areas it good. real good, and others it way off. Social Sciences tend to very well done. same for mathematics. Just thought I would add that.

[Eris]

Wikipedia is not a valid source of information. For school projects, or general factual information.

It tries, but with many users being able to edit information as they see fit, it often becomes fiction instead of fact.

On the other hand, any information available to schoolchildren on any subject is so dumbed down that schoolbooks aren't a valid source of information either.

[Fabala]

I think it should be allowed to give students a general overview of the subject they're researching, and even point them in the right direction for other sources. But it's too unreliable to be a viable source itself. Yes, I understand it's regulated pretty regularly, but the very fact that it has the potential to be ruined by idiots tells me to steer clear. I love it for personal knowledge, and looking up random facts, but when it comes to research papers? I head to the library for books and journals.