Reading7----CAI YAYU

1） Summary

Wikipedia is not usually considered a primary reference in academic research because its content characteristics and quality control mechanisms are not fully aligned with the requirements of academic research. The following are some of the reasons why Wikipedia is not used as a primary reference in academic research:
1. Lack of academic review and validation: Wikipedia content is created by volunteer editors and is not subject to rigorous academic review and validation. This means that Wikipedia content may contain incorrect, inaccurate or unverified information and is not suitable for use as a reliable reference in academic research.
2. Instability and change: Wikipedia content can be edited and changed at any time, so there is no guarantee that the information cited will remain stable and consistent in the future. This is unacceptable for scholarly research that requires citation and referencing over time.
3. Subjectivity and bias: Wikipedia entries can be influenced by the subjective views and biases of individual editors, resulting in non-objective and biased content. In academic research, there is a need to use material that has been objectively and authoritatively researched, rather than Wikipedia, which may be biased.
4. Academic authority and credibility: Academic research usually requires the use of rigorously reviewed and validated authoritative sources such as academic journals, academic books and professional reports as primary references to ensure the credibility and authority of the research. The content of Wikipedia, on the other hand, may not have sufficient academic authority and credibility.
While Wikipedia can be a starting point for an initial understanding of a topic and may be a useful reference resource in some non-academic contexts, in academic research, priority should be given to using authoritative, academically reviewed and validated sources as primary references to ensure the quality and reliability of the research.

2.   Interesting point

Because Wikipedia cannot be considered a reliable source, the use of Wikipedia is not accepted in many schools and universities in writing a formal paper, and some educational institutions have banned it as a primary source while others have limited its use to only a pointer to external sources.The criticism of not being a reliable source, however, may not only apply to Wikipedia but to encyclopedias in general—some university lectures are not impressed when students cite print-based encyclopedias in assigned work.

3.   Discussion point

How do you think Wikipedia should ensure attitudinal accuracy?

Comments

  1. LI XINWEIApril 20, 2023 at 8:14 PM

    Multiple perspectives, community audits, community support and reliable sources.

    ReplyDelete
  2. LUANQIANYUEApril 20, 2023 at 10:30 PM

    Encourage a diverse editorial community: One way to ensure accurate attitudes is to have a diverse editorial team.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Reading 3——CHENXINLEI

  1）  Summary   This article discusses the advantages and disadvantages of Wikipedia's "openness" features. The author gives a detailed description of these five open characteristics.( Open content 、 Transparency 、 Integrity 、 Nondiscrimination 、 Noninterference) “ A central aspiration in the pursuit of a universal encyclopedia is increased access to information: an opening of opportunity and capability to anyone with a desire to learn. ” Open communities allow everyone to learn or express their thoughts on Wikipedia.Open knowledge community is not only an important gathering place for knowledge innovation and sharing, but also a source of wisdom.In such an environment, users are content sharers, creators, and providers of wisdom. “ people don’t even agree about which is which. ”   However, the malicious controversy brought about by such an environment cannot ignore a problem. Everyone's ideas are different, and it is because of the open environment that it is easier...
Read more

Reading 4

 1. Summary The article argues that understanding Wikipedia requires appreciating its community and collaborative culture, but also recognizing the challenges it faces from personal differences and external threats. Despite its collaborative nature, Wikipedia has been shaped by authorial leadership, with an informal benevolent dictator guiding the community and mediating disputes. However, this leadership role can be challenging to balance, as new responsibilities and authority may arise. The article uses examples, such as Sanger's reflections on his departure from the community and discussions about Wales's role, to illustrate the delicate balance of leadership in the Wikipedia community. 2. Interesting As an AI language model, I do not have personal opinions, but I can identify some points that may be interesting to readers. One interesting point is how the author describes the culture and community of Wikipedia and how it has been shaped by authorial leadership. The idea of ...
Read more

Reading7——HE YUNONG

  1. Summary After reading this article, I understand that Wikipedia articles must have reliable sources, and the opinions in the sources should be neutral. Articles should be based on reliable, independent, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. This means that we publish only the analysis, views, and opinions of reliable authors, and not those of Wikipedians who have read and interpreted primary source material for themselves. 2. Interesting points News headlines—including subheadlines—are not a reliable source.  I think this is important because some news headlines are written to grab the reader's attention quickly and briefly; their news content may be exaggerated or lack context, and even sometimes contain sensational claims. 3. Discussion points Do you know how to test reliable sources?
Read more