"Wikipedia is about as good a source of accurate information as Britannica, the venerable standard-bearer of facts about the world around us, according to a study published this week in the journal Nature."
Where do you go when you need to know something? In this age of information and technology, there are a lot of choices out there. Which websites should you trust as reliable sources? How can we know the information they provide is accurate and true?
One of the most popular websites in the world, Wikipedia has been controversial since it's start. We've all had at least one person tell us not to trust Wikipedia, because anyone can edit it. However, does that really mean it's less accurate?
=
Instructions: Read the three linked articles (above and in the questions below). Answer all five questions in a comment. Do not repeat what others have already said. Contribute your own relevant, unique viewpoint to the conversation.
Instructions:
Read the three linked articles (above and in the questions below). Answer all five questions in a comment. Do not repeat what others have already said. Contribute your own relevant, unique viewpoint to the conversation.
im doing mine in a doc
ReplyDelete1. People can change false content or report them/
Delete2.Yes.
3.In my opinion, Wikipedia became less accurate because in more people can make account and edit it since we have better technology now
4.It says that it does not consider itself reliable and discourge user to use it for research or academic purposes
5. Yes, I personally did not know about the reliability rate and it changed my mind about using wikipedia in the future.
1. It is a widely known fact that anyone can modify the text on Wikipedia. However, that does not mean that all of the information is false. Volunteer editors oversee information posted to the site. They verify whether or not the information is true, and they often edit text that contains false or biased views. This is why most of the information offered by Wikipedia is true.
ReplyDelete2. Encyclopedia Britannica is a website that is commonly used for gaining information on historical subjects. The site is regarded as one of the most accurate sources for factual information. Not only have I known the website exists for a long time, but I also often utilize it for research. This is due to the fact that the knowledge offered by Encyclopedia Britannica is, according to studies, educational and accurate. Therefore, its reputation is what encouraged me to make use of the website.
3. The article pertaining to Wikipedia was published in 2015. It also states that a 2005 study established that information found on Wikipedia is almost as accurate as knowledge found on Encyclopedia Britannica. This can be attributed to the fact that Wikipedia is edited by volunteers, and that the information that the site provides is constantly being changed. This, I believe, is why Wikipedia has become more accurate since 2015. Volunteer editors have ensured that the site is error free, while others have updated most information in order to keep it from becoming archaic.
4. Reliability is the most controversial aspect of Wikipedia. This is due to the fact that most information offered by the site is regarded as false. However, while Wikipedia itself has stated that its text can be edited by anyone, it also admits to having teams of volunteer editors review any intelligence submitted to the website. Some of the editors are even professionals in certain scientific fields. This, therefore, drastically reduces any vandalism that may occur on the website.
5. My opinion of Wikipedia has been changed. I originally thought the site would contain multitudes of errors and false information. Subsequently, I viewed it as less accurate than Encyclopedia Britannica. However, these studies and articles have shown me the ways in which Wikipedia's standards are being upheld. Not only is the site subject to much editing, but it is also searched for false information. This is why I now believe Wikipedia is accurate.
1. People can change false content or report them/
ReplyDelete2.Yes.
3.In my opinion, Wikipedia became less accurate because in more people can make account and edit it since we have better technology now
4.It says that it does not consider itself reliable and discourge user to use it for research or academic purposes
5. Yes, I personally did not know about the reliability rate and it changed my mind about using wikipedia in the future.
1. People can change false content or report it
ReplyDelete2.Yes.
3. Wikipedia became less accurate because in more people can make account and edit it since we have better technology now
4.It says that it does not consider itself reliable and discourge user to use it for research or academic purposes
5. Yes, I personally did not know about the reliability rate and it changed my mind about using wikipedia in the future.
1. people who know the information can change it back. 2. yea
ReplyDelete3. its became less accurate because of our developement of technology.
4. it claims its not 100% accurate because of people editing it but it should be close.
5. i wasnt a fan of wikipedia until mr simmer okayed it but this article has me stuck in the middle.
1- volunteer editors oversee false or true information people make up or copy and put on the internet.
ReplyDelete2- No i haven't but from what i heard encyclopedia Britannica is a website used for finding information on historical subjects.
3-Yes because Wikipedia is a more trusted and error free site and is gradually being updated consistently to the newest information .
4-Its supposedly to be very successful do to people editing it for ,also it does not consider itself reliable.
5-I actually always consider using it but i didn't kno about the reliability rate much .
1. There's people that check the information before it goes out. These people are called editors.
ReplyDelete2. Yes.
3. I think that wikipedia is less acurate than then. I like to use education and .org sites.
4. Everybody just wonders if Wikipedia is reliable or not.
5. I had always been taught that wikipedia was not a reliable source until I got in this class, now I guess I'll use it more.
this is Jada Nicole
Delete1.Wikipedia has people that try to ensure that the articles are accurate. If the information is false it can be removed and replaced with the correct information.
ReplyDelete2. Yes.
3. I think it has become more accurate since 2015.
4.Wikipedia doesn´t consider itself to be reliable and accurate
5.The information I have read has changed my perspective on Wikipedia because I didn´t know that anyone could edit the articles on Wikipedia. I feel as if it is still a good site, you juts have to be careful.
This is Ta´Kira Rhine
Delete1. There are people that check for false information and make sure to take down things that are not true.
ReplyDelete2. yes
3. I think it is more accurate
4. They do not consider themselves %100 accurate
5. This has not changed my opinion because I still think it is accurate for the most part
1. It is a widely known fact that anyone can modify the text on Wikipedia. However, that does not mean that all of the information is false. Volunteer editors oversee information posted to the site. They verify whether or not the information is true, and they often edit text that contains false or biased views. This is why most of the information offered by Wikipedia is true.
ReplyDelete2. Encyclopedia Britannica is a website that is commonly used for gaining information on historical subjects. The site is regarded as one of the most accurate sources for factual information. Not only have I known the website exists for a long time, but I also often utilize it for research. This is due to the fact that the knowledge offered by Encyclopedia Britannica is, according to studies, educational and accurate. Therefore, its reputation is what encouraged me to make use of the website.
3. The article pertaining to Wikipedia was published in 2015. It also states that a 2005 study established that information found on Wikipedia is almost as accurate as knowledge found on Encyclopedia Britannica. This can be attributed to the fact that Wikipedia is edited by volunteers, and that the information that the site provides is constantly being changed. This, I believe, is why Wikipedia has become more accurate since 2015. Volunteer editors have ensured that the site is error free, while others have updated most information in order to keep it from becoming archaic.
4. Reliability is the most controversial aspect of Wikipedia. This is due to the fact that most information offered by the site is regarded as false. However, while Wikipedia itself has stated that its text can be edited by anyone, it also admits to having teams of volunteer editors review any intelligence submitted to the website. Some of the editors are even professionals in certain scientific fields. This, therefore, drastically reduces any vandalism that may occur on the website.
5. My opinion of Wikipedia has been changed. I originally thought the site would contain multitudes of errors and false information. Subsequently, I viewed it as less accurate than Encyclopedia Britannica. However, these studies and articles have shown me the ways in which Wikipedia's standards are being upheld. Not only is the site subject to much editing, but it is also searched for false information. This is why I now believe Wikipedia is accurate.
1. Wikipedia has fact-checking workers, that constantly check what people add or edit to ensure that it is true.
ReplyDelete2. Yes
3. I think wikipedia has become more reliable over the years, because it is more updated and a little harder to access editing.
4. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that allows access to people to edit and change what it says. It also has volunteer editors that obsessively fact check everything added or edited.
5. I've always used wikipedia as a resource, but these articles make me feel like I can trust it a little more.
This is Peyton Hearn
Delete1. Although anyone can sign in and edit Wikipedia, what keeps false information from remaining on the site?
ReplyDeleteYou have people who oversee the information and try to check to make sure it is accurate. I’ve learn that if you find something that is not accurate that you can change it.
2. Had you ever heard of the Encyclopedia Britannica before today?
Yes, I have, my mom is a teacher and I think I heard her mention it before.
3. Notice the year that the article (above) was published. Do you think Wikipedia has become more or less accurate since then? (Hint: read this 2015 article from the Washington Post)
I think that it has come more accurate. I say this because so many people have complained about it in the past that the website is working on ensuring that they bring the most accurate information to the readers. That way it can be more of a credible site to use in the future.
4. Summarize what Wikipedia says about itself in terms of reliability: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia
It is written and edited by volunteer editors that follow particular guidelines. Wikipedia reliability is stated that it can by edited by anyone and has an inclusion threshold.
5. Do these articles and studies change your opinion of Wikipedia as a source? Why or why not?
NO it does not change anything for me about wekepedia. I have used it plenty of times and I find the information to be reliable. I guess you really don’t know if it is true or not unless you do further research on the topic. I would use it if I wanted to find some quick points about things.
1. People can change false content or report it
ReplyDelete2.Yes.
3. Wikipedia became less accurate because in more people can make account and edit it since we have better technology now
4.It says that it does not consider itself reliable and discourge user to use it for research or academic purposes
5. Yes, I personally did not know about the reliability rate and it changed my mind about using wikipedia in the future.
1. There are people who check the information to ensure that it is accurate.
ReplyDelete2. Yes
3. Since 2005, I think Wikipedia has become more accurate.
4. In terms of reliability, Wikipedia does not think they are accurate or reliable.
5. My opinion about Wikipedia has not changed because I have always been told that it was not reliable but, we continue to use it in class.