|
|
Using and Evaluating Wikipedia Articles |
Wikipedia is a very popular online
encyclopedia and its articles provide a huge amount of information, but it is
important to be aware that:
·
anyone can
write or edit a Wikipedia article (so
there is no assurance that what is written is accurate),
·
all
Wikipedia authors are anonymous (so
you cannot verify the credibility of the article based on the author’s
background), and therefore:
·
Wikipedia articles should not be cited
in college research papers and information from Wikipedia articles should always be verified from a second,
reliable source.
Information from Wikipedia can be very useful, however,
if used thoughtfully and appropriately.
Wikipedia articles are
particularly useful to:
·
provide
some basic background information on a topic (to get some quick, introductory
information, not critical facts for academic research)
·
get
links to more verifiable and authoritative information (links from Wikipedia articles can lead you to good
quality, credible data),
·
find
information on people, publications and organizations that can help you
evaluate information from other sources (e.g. if you find information from a
magazine or an organization you are unfamiliar with, Wikipedia can give you a brief description of the magazine or
organization that can help you decide whether the information is credible.)
You should always
evaluate any source of information you use. Ask yourself questions about the information
source, such as:
·
What
individual or organization is responsible for producing the information? (Are
they credible and qualified to produce it?)
·
Why
was it produced? (Is the author trying
to promote an idea or sell a product?)
·
Where
did the information come from? (Does the
author cite his or her sources?)
·
Who
is the intended audience? (Is it intended for the general public, or is it
meant for specific groups, such as scholars, children, etc.?)
Specific steps to evaluate Wikipedia
articles:
Wikipedia
has special policies and organizational methods that can be used to help you
evaluate its articles. Follow the specific suggested steps below to evaluate Wikipedia articles:
1.
Look for template messages or for featured
article status.
Users can place messages on an article indicating problems
with citations, style, Wikipedia
policies (e.g. “Neutral
point of view“, “Verifiability”, "No original research") and more. For examples of different messages, look up template
messages in Wikipedia. Also,
articles can receive a status of "featured
articles" (look for a star on the top right side), which indicates
that they have met certain Wikipedia
standards of excellence.
2.
Does the article have citations for its
assertions and facts?
Pay attention to the hyperlinked footnotes throughout the
article. Are important assertions being cited and what are those sources? If
sources are available, check to see if they are being cited properly. Some
sources will be considered more authoritative than other sources, but the type
of sources chosen, as well as the quantity available, will depend upon the
article. A topic from popular culture, like the character Pikachu
from Pokemon, would have very different types of
sources than an article on a U.S.
President. And, likewise, many more authoritative resources will be
available to authors writing about a U.S. President.
3.
Check the edit history of the article.
Every article in Wikipedia
has an edit history. Look for the tab labeled "History" at the top on
the article. The quantity of edits over a period of time will be an indication
of how much effort has been put into constructing the article. Likewise, you
can choose to look at the article from any point in its edit history and view a
note about what changes were completed. This can be a good way to determine
whether an article may have been vandalized before you decided to use it.
4.
Has an edit to a Wikipedia article been made
anonymously?
The edit history provides either an IP address or a username
for each edit to an article. Although, we should always question the accuracy
of any contribution, we should ask whether it matters that the contribution was
made anonymously. Every contributor will bring a different level of bias and
experience to an article. However, by making a contribution anonymously, it
becomes more difficult to evaluate these levels. Note that with IP sniffing
some addresses can be traced back to their owning organization. So edits done
anonymously from IP addresses within Microsoft, the CIA, etc, do tell us
something about the contributor.
5.
If an edit isn't anonymous, check out the
User's page.
User pages will list the user's contributions, but sometimes
they tell us about the user, his or her age, interests, level of education
and experience and more. Find the User's page by clicking on the username found
in the edit history. Again, be critical, you can't always trust virtual
identities.
6.
When viewing the edit history of an article,
look for a diversity of contributors.
Most articles will benefit from a diversity of
contributions. Articles in print encyclopedias often draw upon one expert. But
with most subjects there are many different ways to approach a subject. This is
true even amongst experts. Still this doesn't mean that every viewpoint is of
equal value, what it does mean is that information gathered from multiple
sources is usually more well-rounded and informed. Think of a research paper
for school that had 2 sources versus another one with 20 sources, which paper
do you think would be better?
7.
Read the Discussion Notes.
Click on the "Discussion" tab at the top of the
article for a background on the article's content. The background discussion of
an article can provide a lot of important information about the article. For
example, it can provide the reasons why an article was written the way it was.
The Discussion notes include challenges, ongoing debates, as well as
discussions about possible additions and improvements.
8.
Think about how the information will be used.
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. General and
specialty encyclopedias are good for finding information quick. They are also a
good place to start for a research project. But they are meant to be an
introduction to your subject, not the final word. Usually, encyclopedias—including
Wikipedia--are not good resources to
cite. Good research requires comparing multiple primary and secondary resources
critically.
The above suggested steps for evaluating Wikipedia articles come from: “Research
Tip: When to Trust Wikipedia?” from the Johnson County Library,
|
|
last revised: 2-11-09 |
