Just because it sounds intelligent, doesn't mean you should trust it.

Nearly everyone in today's world has heard of the major online resource Wikipedia. There seems to be a singly powerful point when it comes to actually using Wikipedia as an attributed source when writing papers and such.

What should you do when there are academics using Wikipedia in their research? There are others however that adamantly deter their students from using this "online encyclopedia." So, what can a student do who needs a source, but the academics of the world are sending them mixed messages? I would recommend using extreme caution and not wholly using Wikipedia.

Look at the example of two college students that lost thousands of dollars, their education, quite possibly a trip of a lifetime, and now have their shame immortalized for every internet user looking to find it, to see. In the case of these two students, they used Wikipedia and then did not properly cite their chosen quotations. For most every English major out there, the mere thought of citing information from Wikipedia is anathema. Add that to the fact that the information was cited wrong and chills are sure to be running down their spines.

Wikipedia has not had the best of track records when it comes to either the validity of its contents or how it came to posses them. It has been known that Wikipedia has scooped news-media outlets on the death of Tim Russert. It's also been stated that the updater responsible for this leak was subsequently dealt with, but it more than likely all depends on how this updater came across the information. If he had not gathered his information from a credible news source, then it is possible that the public was simply traveling on with hearsay in there back pocket.

However, one of the main sticking points as to the untrustworthiness of using Wikipedia as a dependable source is its ability to be edited by amateurs. Since its beginning, Wikipedia has been made up of volunteers. These volunteer editors have written millions of articles, but how do we know that they possess the educational degrees and know-how to write these articles? The articles seen on Wikipedia were not published in a peer-reviewed environment by professionals who have participated in numerous studies pertaining to their chosen subject.

There's also the fact that the information to be found on Wikipedia is subject to change without notice and in often varying amounts. However, that does not mean that the information that once was there is gone forever. Quite the opposite actually. Every article that was deleted in some fashion is transfered over to DeletionPedia. So naturally, every article that is erased or otherwise greatly altered can be uncovered by individuals aspiring to cite Wikipedia. This simply amplifies the fact that anyone can find what they are looking for on the internet. You just need to know where to look.

In the end, Wikipedia is a great source of controversy. It's true that it can provide you with a wealth of information, but you probably should never use it in an academic paper. If you ever just want to look up some random fact, Wikipedia might be your best bet so long as you take whatever you get from it with a grain of salt. When you really need to search for reliable sites, Wikipedia may be able to help point you in the right direction.

If you'd like to check out the thoughts of some of my peers...search no further.