Pages: [1]
  Print
Author Topic: Avoiding Wikipedia  (Read 9905 times)
Arvin Ortiz
Initiate
*

Karma: +2/-0
Posts: 21



View Profile WWW
« on: September 01, 2009, 05:11:11 PM »

Some professors have expressed their grave concerns over the studentsā€™ use of Wikipedia as their source in research papers, theses, etc. They dismissed it as unreliable. They suggest instead that students use credible sources like books, journals, and trustworthy electronic sources.

But what if the book one is using cited Wikipedia as its source?

A case in point is the book we once used for our subject Educ M (The Teaching Profession). The book is authored by Purita P. Bilbao, Brenda B. Corpuz, Avelina T. Lagas and Gloria G. Salandanan, all of whom are Ed.D. and Ph.D. holders.

A passage in the book reads: "After you have gotten an idea on the philosophy/ies you lean [sic] let us know more about each of them. The following notes were lifted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_education."
« Last Edit: September 01, 2009, 05:13:27 PM by Arvin Ortiz » Logged
Joe Carillo
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +52/-2
Posts: 3253


View Profile Email
« Reply #1 on: September 02, 2009, 11:37:16 AM »

Could you possibly post a PDF or JPG image of the page of the book where that citation for Wikipedia appears? It would help Forum members appreciate the context of the citation better and see if its use is justifiable or not. At this point, all we can really be certain about is that the English of that passage citing Wikipedia is grammatically, semantically, and stylistically awful.
Logged

Arvin Ortiz
Initiate
*

Karma: +2/-0
Posts: 21



View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: September 04, 2009, 06:16:11 PM »

I'm sorry, Sir Joe, but neither is the PDF version nor the JPG image of the book is available.
Logged
Joe Carillo
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +52/-2
Posts: 3253


View Profile Email
« Reply #3 on: September 06, 2009, 01:03:16 PM »

We actually don't need the entire book in PDF or JPG form, just a digital image of the particular page or pages you referred to. You can have the digital image taken in an Internet shop, or you can simply shoot the pages with a mobile phone that has a built-in camera and convert the images to the desired format. This done, you can do either of two things: simply e-mail the image file to me so I can post it, or, if you know how, upload it to PhotoBucket or a similar image-hosting service and make your posting on the Forum to indicate the link. It's actually a very simple procedure once learned and done once.

I'm sure we can have a very lively discussion about that Wikipedia textbook citation once the Forum members are able to see that digital image.



 
Logged

Cruise
Initiate
*

Karma: +0/-0
Posts: 8


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: September 06, 2009, 03:59:51 PM »

Is Wikipedia really not a good source of knowledge? To be honest, I thought it was good. Can you share us some compelling reasons why we need to avoid visiting or using the website as a source of knowledge?
Logged
florlaca
Full Member
***

Karma: +1/-0
Posts: 50


View Profile Email
« Reply #5 on: September 07, 2009, 07:40:10 AM »

The problem with citing the web is that you may be citing poor quality information. Wikipedia articles, for example, are open for editing, and some of those making corrections or additions may not be authorities in the field. Already there are editors of scientific journals who complain that their original papers in Wikipedia have been messed up.

For graduate students, the best source of information for their thesis is the peer-reviewed international journals. The Instruction to Authors of these journals may have information if you can freely cite the web. For a more detailed guide to literature search for graduate thesis, read ā€œTraining graduate studentsā€ by clicking this site.


Logged
Cruise
Initiate
*

Karma: +0/-0
Posts: 8


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: September 07, 2009, 08:41:01 AM »

Thanks! Yes, I agree with you completely, it's a website that you can edit and post whatever you want freely and the possibility for the info (as you have mentioned) to be very poor or messed up is very high because everyone can do it. Smiley
Logged
jasonago
Initiate
*

Karma: +1/-0
Posts: 6


View Profile Email
« Reply #7 on: October 18, 2009, 04:51:52 PM »

I think Wikipedia is reliable enough for you to know something about a topic. But if you will use Wikipedia for formal research, thesis, and dissertations, caution must be applied.

Wikipedia is poorly peer-reviewed. The contents of Wikipedia are co-edited by different people all over the world but that does not mean it is peer reviewed by experts in the respective fields.

I for sometime edited some contents in the Wikipedia particularly the part about "Eternal Flame song" I like that song very much and for some time I researched other versions of that song and posted it on Wikipedia. NO ONE objected to the validity of my posts. I am not a musician and I am not in any way affiliated with the Bangles and its management. So the things that I post, no matter how truthful, is still doubtful.

Still at the end of the day, personal discretion is advised when citing Wikipedia in any material.

P.S. Does the quotation you post the same as the one in the book you are saying? I think authors should cite materials using a standard style like the APA style. It only shows that the authors are a little unconcerned about the style and references of their book.
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print
 
Jump to: