Wikipedia?

Jump to Last Post 1-15 of 15 discussions (30 posts)
  1. Shealy Healy profile image61
    Shealy Healyposted 9 years ago

    What do you think of Wikipedia?

    1. awirelessbusiness profile image60
      awirelessbusinessposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      It comes up during searches on most engines, so I look at the results, but since anyone can pretty much write whatever they want some things may not be quite factual. It is an interesting and useful concept businesses are embracing for internal use.

    2. awirelessbusiness profile image60
      awirelessbusinessposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      It comes up during searches on most engines, so I look at the results, but since anyone can pretty much write whatever they want some things may not be quite factual. It is an interesting and useful concept businesses are embracing for internal use.

    3. itcoll profile image60
      itcollposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      It is simply great.And i like them more since they are ad-free.

    4. Drew Breezzy profile image69
      Drew Breezzyposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      The answer to everything

  2. thranax profile image47
    thranaxposted 9 years ago

    I think it is a great source for information and will remain successful.

    ~thranax~

  3. profile image0
    Jenny-Anneposted 9 years ago

    I find it really convenient for quick references - just to get a brief definition.

  4. skristoff profile image60
    skristoffposted 9 years ago

    I use it as a start for all of my writing research.  I say as a "start", because I never use it as a primary reference.  I do take everything with a grain of salt, and follow up on the references used in each entry.

    It's also a useful place to look up answers to questions my 6 year old asks me, because he doesn't really care about citing sources yet.

    1. Dao Hoa profile image61
      Dao Hoaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      It is very true, kid only needs a reasonable answer. However, you should make sure it is not too far from the fact because your kid may find a correct one later. In that case he will not be you "fan" nay more!

  5. TV Mount Guy profile image60
    TV Mount Guyposted 8 years ago

    I'll chime in and agree that it's a good source of quick info to many questions.  If you are doing real research, wiki should just give a guide of other sources to look into, but double check everything.

  6. prettydarkhorse profile image64
    prettydarkhorseposted 8 years ago

    it is a good secondary source for initially defining terms but not as a primary source for your research and actual writing

    1. K Partin profile image60
      K Partinposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I agree pdh, a great secondary source, but I would still do my own research. smile

  7. The_Boss profile image59
    The_Bossposted 8 years ago

    It is one of my primary sources for research for school and other purposes. A lot of people say that since people can post whatever they want to, the information is wrong. However, this is false because each article you write or add on to is previewed and accepted by the wiki staff and their automated system. They can undo any changes that someone has erratically posted. I love using wikipedia and I will never stop using it.

  8. Frugal Fanny profile image61
    Frugal Fannyposted 8 years ago

    Wikipedia is a great quick-reference resource, BUT....you have to remember that the articles are composed and submitted by average Joe Reader.  I have found that sometimes you need to double-check the information, as it can sometimes be opinion-biased.

    Also, even though I like it for quick look-ups....I have heard that a lot of schools here (western canada) won't take it as a valid research tool on papers.

    1. HubMerc profile image61
      HubMercposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Ah, so it's like the news media, then.  Got it. wink

    2. darkside profile image79
      darksideposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Thank goodness for that.

      It's good to get the gist of a topic by skimming through a wikipedia article. Then using the broad overview to have a better understanding when more research takes place.

  9. lrohner profile image80
    lrohnerposted 8 years ago

    I've found some errors in Wikipedia, so I'm not a big fan. I actually prefer WiseGeek. Their overviews are spot on and much shorter than Wikipedia. I write for Demand Studios, and Wikipedia is on their blacklist of sites that we cannot reference or cite.

    1. Lady_E profile image65
      Lady_Eposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Thats worrying - I find Wiki very useful and thought their info was well up-to-date. Will check out WiseGeek.
      Thanks smile

    2. Sue Adams profile image96
      Sue Adamsposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Is that because the contributions come from the general public?

      1. skristoff profile image60
        skristoffposted 8 years agoin reply to this

        I believe that Wikipedia is blacklisted as a source for Demand articles (as well as for other information portals) because it is considered a competitor.

  10. relache profile image84
    relacheposted 8 years ago

    Wikipedia quality can vary widely.  Sometimes it's very informative and sometimes it's downright inaccurate.

    And many people using it for a reference can't tell the difference.

    I like to see the cited sources on Wikipedia entries and go actually read those.

    1. Patty Inglish, MS profile image92
      Patty Inglish, MSposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I agree. The info is often copied from other Intenet pages, all not peer-reviewed. I use Wikipedia only for references listed and some photos. Then I access references myself. Sometimes, they even no longer exist. Thanks!

  11. profile image52
    media.geekposted 8 years ago

    be careful when using wikipedia as some information is wrong, anyone can post information about certain subjects that isn't always write. x

    1. lrohner profile image80
      lrohnerposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Ditto, ditto and ditto. Wikipedia may be spot on in some cases, and well off the mark in others.

  12. Shealy Healy profile image61
    Shealy Healyposted 8 years ago

    I think Wikipedia is great. Buuut, I am in the process of presenting to Wikipedia a term that is often used in alternative spiritualities. Because the word is not documented well-they are having a problem listing it.

    Clairgnosis

    1. ediggity profile image59
      ediggityposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Wikipedia is a good starting point, but can only be taken at face value.  NPR did a pretty good piece on the site her:

      http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor … Id=4506421

      I think that people/students who rely solely on Wikipedia for the bulk of their research are short changing themselves and their audience.

      1. Uninvited Writer profile image83
        Uninvited Writerposted 8 years agoin reply to this

        I definitely agree with that.

  13. Shealy Healy profile image61
    Shealy Healyposted 8 years ago

    Good article. Thanks Ediggity.

  14. profile image59
    C.J. Wrightposted 8 years ago

    While some of the information may be slanted or plain wrong, the references are listed. Therefore it makes a good jumping off point for research.

  15. rhamson profile image76
    rhamsonposted 8 years ago

    I think it gives you several points of view and sometimes gives you a broader report on topics.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)