Recommended Wikipedia Entries

Philip Overby · Jun 26, 2012

Zero Angel · Jul 27, 2012

Wikipedia is a morass of information. When doing research for my multiverse, I regularly have 99+ tabs open all from Wikipedia!

It gets to the point where it is slowing down my computer, but each new page spawns three or four more before I can close it so it is the never-ending hydra of death by information in my opinion.

...but in a good way.

Ravana · Jul 27, 2012

The biggest problem I've found with recommending Wikipedia entries is that I've often been unable to find content I know was there the last time I looked.…

As long as you're willing to cross-check and verify whatever it does have, it's a reasonable resource.

JCFarnham · Jul 27, 2012

The way I've always seen Wikipedia is kind of akin the high school teacher of physics, or the Prof. Cox of the science world. Aka, they get it mostly right, but as you delve deeper you'll find generalisations to make things easier, whole fields of knowledge open up where previously there was a "weird stuff happens" and little more.

That sound about right?

Saying that I regularly start and end pre-writing research with wikipedia. If something later doesn't ring true enough then I'll do a bit more research but lets be honestly, I'm telling stories about people. Artistic license is fun. And If I'm stuck completely, I ask you guys thinking "Surely Ravana knows"

(By the way Ravana, I was doing some research and have become curious to the origins of your screen name. Or rather, I've found one possible source and want to know if I'm even close haha)

Zero Angel · Jul 27, 2012

That's an interesting point.

I teach at an online college and they regularly tell the students to avoid Wikipedia like the plague. I turn to my students and explain that although Wikipedia is considered a "bad" source, it is not because it is user-generated. It is an encyclopedia, and at best is a secondary source and almost always at least a tertiary source where people have put their own biases and opinions into the article. This is true for all encyclopedias.

Wikipedia has all of its sources listed in footnotes.

Ravana · Jul 27, 2012

JCFarnham said:
The way I've always seen Wikipedia is kind of akin the high school teacher of physics, or the Prof. Cox of the science world. Aka, they get it mostly right, but as you delve deeper you'll find generalisations to make things easier, whole fields of knowledge open up where previously there was a "weird stuff happens" and little more.

Depends on the entry. Most of the scientific ones are so dense you need to be in the field to be able to read them at all. (I think I could easily pick up a few more Bachelors' degrees at this point, if all I needed to do was take a final exam… simply from having picked up so much of the language. And as long as they don't include math problems.…)

Saying that I regularly start and end pre-writing research with wikipedia. If something later doesn't ring true enough then I'll do a bit more research but lets be honestly, I'm telling stories about people. Artistic license is fun. And If I'm stuck completely, I ask you guys thinking "Surely Ravana knows"

And if Ravana doesn't, Ravana pops over to Wikipedia to check up on it.

And then cross-checks and verifies to make sure it's at least mostly correct.

Which, by the way, they are. I was briefly part of their "community," and what I learned is that there are people who hover over their favorite topics, backing out illicit changes almost as rapidly as they occur. Which I don't think happens very often any more. On the whole, it tends to be as reliable as any print resource you're likely to find, and is far more likely to be up to date, simply because it can be updated. If you're ever unsure, check the entry again in an hour (or maybe a day) and see if it says the same thing.

In spite of all that, you should still never use it as a primary source, in terms of doing things like actual research papers. You can tell your students they can start with Wikipedia, in order to help find sources; just never rely on it, let alone cite it. That's what I've done.

By the way, for those who didn't know (and who, like Zero Angel, might care about this point): Wikipedia has a strict policy against posting primary research. All of their content is intended to be secondary, as with any other encyclopedia.

(Of course, we all know that no researcher would ever insert his own opinions or biases in his research publications.…

In this instance, Wikipedia has at least the potential advantage over going directly to primary sources, in that the articles often include opposed viewpoints–whereas primary sources often do not. This can at least lead the student to realize there are opposing views on the topic.…)

(By the way Ravana, I was doing some research and have become curious to the origins of your screen name. Or rather, I've found one possible source and want to know if I'm even close haha)

(Probably. Multiple heads have their uses.

)

JCFarnham · Jul 27, 2012

Ravana said:
(Probably. Multiple heads have their uses. )

Well, good stuff then. I feel I should also tell you I'm adopting parts of that particular source for a future short story/novella in the Faebound universe. Mainly because I imagine you'll quickly find a thread pop up in Research once I start writing it

Zero Angel · Jul 29, 2012

Ravana said:
(Of course, we all know that no researcher would ever insert his own opinions or biases in his research publications.… In this instance, Wikipedia has at least the potential advantage over going directly to primary sources, in that the articles often include opposed viewpoints—whereas primary sources often do not. This can at least lead the student to realize there are opposing views on the topic.…)

Great point here, Ravana! Most encyclopedias I've encountered have each article written by a single expert in the field, which can present very biased viewpoints for some of their articles.

Wikipedia wins more often than it loses in my opinion.

Recommended Wikipedia Entries

Philip Overby

Staff

Zero Angel

Auror

Ravana

Istar

JCFarnham

Auror

Zero Angel

Auror

Ravana

Istar

JCFarnham

Auror

Zero Angel

Auror

Similar threads