• creed10@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    my understanding from an English professor is less about its reliability of information, but more its reliability regarding citing sources. you can’t cite something that consistently changes

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      The schools should have used wikipedia as an opportunity to teach media literacy. You don’t use wiki as your source, you go to the cited sources and investigate those. Use the cited sources a in your school reports.

    • A2PKXG@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Technically you could cite a version in the version history. But Wikipedia isn’t about being right. It’s about trying to get It better

    • rchive@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      That might be one reason why some warned against using it, but I definitely had teachers in middle school and high school that explicitly said not to use it because it could be changed by anyone including people who could be wrong or lying.

    • PutangInaMo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      And the ability for folks to change it and provide inaccurate sources. It’s peer reviewed for the most part and academia wants officially peer reviewed sources.

    • TheRTV@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hmm, interesting. When I was in HS, I would paraphrase Wiki and use their citations in my bibliography 😆

    • zephyreks@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s also just often completely inaccurate. The standards it uses to cite works make them pretty much useless: any good information on Wikipedia is on there by accident.

      • DauntingFlamingo@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That is wildly inaccurate and you know it. There are like 6.5 million articles on Wikipedia and the majority (since people are pedantic, we’ll say 50.1%) are well cited and accurate

        • zephyreks@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Have you looked at what’s considered a valid “source” on Wikipedia?

          The fact that there’s an odd good article does not make the site a reliable source of anything.