preview

Ham

Satisfactory Essays
With five billion pages a month and millions of topics covered by those five billion pages, one might argue that Wikipedia is a legitimate research method. So what? There is five billion pages covering numerous topics. Who writes these pages? Are they credible authors and certified experts on the topics? Probably not because according to “Wikipedia: About,” “Wikipedia is written collaboratively by largely anonymous Internet volunteers who write without pay” (Wikipedia 421). Due to the fact that anyone can edit a page, its anonymous volunteer authors, and the fact that it helps kids take the easy way out when researching, Wikipedia is not a legitimate research method.
Who would you trust more when researching information for a class, a certified expert on the subject or someone’s littler brother or sister? I am hoping you would trust an expert rather than someone who has little to no knowledge on the subject compared to the expert. “Anyone with Internet access can write and make changes to Wikipedia articles,” states “Wikipedia: About” (Wikipedia 421). That means that someone certified in sports medicine could go create and write a page on lions without expertise on the subject. According to “Wikipedia: About” by Wikipedia, “each day, hundreds of thousands of visitors around the world collectively make tens of thousands of edits and thousands of new pages” (422). No expertise is required to edit or create a page on Wikipedia which makes it a non-legitimate research method.
“In the final analysis, Wikipedia’s greatest strength is also its greatest weakness” (Waters 426). In this case, greatest strength refers to the anonymity of its’ unpaid authors. Because the pages are anonymously created leaves us with the question is this in...

... middle of paper ...

...ext and Anthology. 2nd ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2011. Print.
Messer-Kruse, Timothy. "The "Undue Weight" of Truth on Wikipedia." Practical Argument: A Text and Anthology. By Laurie G. Kirszner and Stephen R. Mandell. 2nd ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2011. 411-13. Print.
Stross, Randall. "Anonymous Source Is Not the Same as Open Source." Practical Argument: A Text and Anthology. By Laurie G. Kirszner and Stephen R. Mandell. 2nd ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2011. 417-20. Print.
Waters, Neil. "Wikiphobia: The Latest in Open Source." Practical Argument: A Text and Anthology. By Laurie G. Kirszner and Stephen R. Mandell. 2nd ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2011. 425-26. Print.
Wikipedia. "Wikipedia: About." Practical Argument: A Text and Anthology. By Laurie G. Kirszner and Stephen R. Mandell. 2nd ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2011. 421-22. Print.
Get Access