by HM Wilson

Created on: January 01, 2009

The English version, according to Wikipedia's website, boasts more than two-and-a-half million articles. It is easily accessible, and it is free. Wikipedia is large, well-known, and it can be quite useful.

However, it is not a one-stop "shop" when it comes to research. When it comes to doing quick research for one's own personal interests, referring to Wikipedia may be sufficient. When it comes to research for articles or academic research, however, the site is but a stepping off point.

Wikipedia does have a lot of information. Much of that information is correct; however, since it is a user-edited site, there is always the danger that someone will accidentally or purposely put incorrect information into an article. That danger has become such an issue that, at times, those in charge of Wikipedia have had to lock articles to keep them from being vandalized.

When it comes to using Wikipedia to satisfy one's own personal questions about a subject, that is fine. Often, the information contained in an article is reliable enough and in-depth enough to satisfy the quick curiosity.

However, when it comes to research for professional writing (or even for other work), Wikipedia should not be the only stop. A quick check of it may help come up with other key words or phrases to plug into a search engine or, perhaps, it may even yield a list of other sites that one might refer to for further information.

Wikipedia is a tool in a professional writer's toolbox. However, it is only one of many reference sources out there. Other sites such as MSN Encarta and Merriam-Webster also offer a great deal of information.

When it comes to academic research and writing, Wikipedia becomes even less desirable. Most teachers and professors frown at having it cited in a student's academic work. The fact is that Wikipedia lacks academic credibility and respect.

The fact that Wikipedia is a user-edited site all but erases its academic validity. The fact, which can be somewhat troubling at times, is that anyone can make changes on there. That includes those who cannot write a proper sentence, those with a political agenda, misogynists, bigots and other assorted fools.

That is not to say that there are not a lot of fine user-editors on Wikipedia (including the author of this article). That is, however, to say that the site is not considered very credible within academic circles. Therefore, students should avoid utilizing it as a significant means of research.

Overall, Wikipedia can be a wonderful tool in many cases. However, as with most things, it does pay to check more than one source. The site can serve as a good jumping off point; however, one does need to consult with other sources, especially when operating within a professional or academic capacity.

Learn more about this author, HM Wilson.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.