W9: Do you think Wikipedia is reliable? Why or why not? WANG XIAOLING,왕효령

 1) Summary

I think the reliability of Wikipedia is gradually increasing. Wikipedia has matured day by day, and the basic facts stated are not wrong, and the basic views described are generally not wrong. Moreover, many entries and articles also provide information sources for people to make further arguments. In other words, as the most basic information material, the accuracy and credibility of Wikipedia is trustworthy. According to an article in Nature in 2005, after comparing Encyclopedia Britannica with Wikipedia, it was found that the accuracy of Encyclopedia Britannica was close to that of Encyclopedia Britannica.

2) Interesting point

Today is the age of digitization, networking and information. There are at least two major characteristics of this era. One is the state of information exploding, prompting people to have to use network search engines and other tool-based methods to obtain the information they need. As of today, who can refuse to use Google, Bing, Yahoo to obtain information? More people have begun to turn to various self-media and online media to speak out and publish their creative and even academic achievements. The purpose of academic research and writing is nothing more than seeking dialogue and creating knowledge. Isn't Wikipedia just a way for people to talk and create knowledge?

3) Discussion point

Do you think that in the future, more and more scholars will definitely cite Wikipedia as an important source of literature?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

W7: GFC book notes By 'William S. Kowinski' , 'Cory Doctorow','Piotr Konieczny' and 'Paul Youngquist'/ 진신

w9: Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? LiuXinlei

W10 : Can we think of some example of how Internet has changed our culture? / 박소민(SOMIN PARK)