As far as internet sources go, we have been taught to always respect subscription encyclopedias (such as Britannica), government websites, and university databases. We have been taught to question the sites of “random” individuals and sites without a listed author unless we can confirm these facts with those from a database that we can trust.
Sadly, Wikipedia.org technically falls into the second category, and it does not garner as much respect as it deserves. Yes, Wikipedia can be edited by anyone and can be grossly inaccurate. HOWEVER, Wikipedia employs experts to ensure the accuracy of its facts and therefore, a very small proportion of Wikipedia’s articles are inaccurate.
Another plus to Wikipedia is the fact that it is free, and therefore, it can be accessed from any computer with an internet connection. No lousy database subscription with a 17 character password required to log-on. Additionally, no annoying advertisements. Instead, Wikipedia provides its users with a user-friendly search interface that allows one to quickly find his/her desired article.
Wikipedia is useful for those of us who want to quickly look up a literary or IM reference. The opening paragraphs of each article provide users with a quick overview of the topic. Additionally, for those of us doing a research project on a topic, a preliminary search on Wikipedia informs us whether our topic is too narrow or too broad. The Wikipedia article can provide us with several suggestions of how to narrow or broaden this field. Furthermore, Wikipedia provides one with outside links to further one’s understanding of any subject.
Also, Wikipedia’s use of fairly simplistic vocabulary assists students from becoming lost in the complicated jargon of a specialized field.
Some critics argue that not all of the information on Wikipedia can necessarily be trusted. I concur; it is important to double check facts with ANOTHER respected database.
While researching, it is likely that you may come across a source with a subjective viewpoint. To filter out this bias, one must ask oneself, “Why is this author writing this? Is he/she out to prove a point? Or does he/she simply want to share his/her knowledge with the world?” If you do come across a source which you feel may be biased, it is best to again check these facts with different sources. But remember, Britannica and .gov sites can be culturally biased (“the most powerful societies write the history books”).
In my research, I intend to skim the majority of the Wikipedia article on nuclear energy. I will select a few portions that interest me to focus on. I will then thoroughly read these sections ALONG WITH outside sources, such as from The Nuclear Energy Institute and the US government’s Energy Information Administration.
~Rick
