Wildnikki09’s Weblog

I am for and against Wikipedia. I am for because although people can change whatever they like on it and add things and take things away, they have people that come check it periodically to make sure things look good. Also, Wikipedia organizes informtion for everyone, is bound by codes of good practice, and seeks to prevent abuse and keep in mind that the “WikiScanner” tool, among many other tools Wikipedia already supplies, provides cautious readers with an additional tool to identify possible manipulation. With Wikipedia, a user is usually provided with a relatively in-depth summary of the inquired topic along with relevant media as well as links to related resources and along with that, within a Wikipedia article a reader may click on various other names, places, topics, and so on to be redirected to an article of that subject for deeper research; you can get everything you need and more from this site. Most Wikipedia articles include sources for the information which can be checked simply by clicking on the citation, and often an author includes further reading for those who may be more interested. Also I definitely think that Wikipedia’s benefits should not be denied to students as a source for education and research because of all the resources at a student’s disposal, few are as controversial as Wikipedia and what I’ve written so far is proof of that. Banning the use of Wikipedia will serve no function other than to deny students an easy, convenient, in depth, and relatively accurate source of information. The focus of teachers should not revolve around denying Wikipedia’s use, but to teach students intelligent critical thinking and judgment skills to be able to tell the difference from good information and bad. Wikipedia is also aware that some of its articles have incorrect information and/or have been vandalized and is considering for implementation to discourage informational vandalism by allowing users to rate or challenge a paragraph, article, or even contributor. Other options include delayed posting of an article, and WikiScanner which would reveal the author of an edit. To conclude my reasoning behind why I am for Wikipedia, I think that it would be foolish to disregard something that combines convenience, reliability, and flexibility in a manner that is both fun and educational. Now, for why I am against Wikipedia. Although Wikipedia’s material is convenient, and fun to use it is not always trustworthy and can sometimes sound very truthful but be completely wrong.