To the Student: Appropriate
Use of Wikipedia
In recent years, Wikipedia (http://www.wikipedia.org/)
has become one of the most important and useful resources
on the Internet. Created by an open community of authors
(anyone can contribute, edit, or correct articles), it
has become a powerful resource for researchers to consult
alongside other established library and online resources.
As in the case of all tools, however, its value is a function
of appropriateness. In the case of college-level essays
or research papers, students should keep in mind the following
limitations:
As in the case of any encyclopedia,
Wikipedia is not appropriate as the primary or sole reference for anything that is central to an argument, complex, or
controversial. "Central
to an argument" means that the topic in question
is crucial for the paper. (For example, a paper about
Shakespeare or postmodernism cannot rely on an encyclopedia
article on those topics.) "Complex" means anything
requiring analysis, critical thought, or evaluation.
(For example, it is not persuasive to cite an encyclopedia
on "spirituality.") "Controversial" means
anything that requires listening to the original voices
in a debate because no consensus or conventional view
has yet emerged. (For example, cite an encyclopedia on
the historical facts underlying a recent political election,
but not on the meaning or trends indicated by that election.)
However, a Wikipedia citation can be an appropriate
convenience when the point being supported is
minor, non-controversial, or also supported by
other evidence.
In addition, Wikipedia is an appropriate source for some extremely
recent topics (especially in popular culture or technology) for which
it provides the sole or best available synthetic, analytical, or historical
discussion. In such cases, however, due diligence requires at least
glancing at the editing "history" of the article (available
through the "history" tab at the top) to get a sense of how controversial
or consensual, unstable or stable, the article has been. (Such due
diligence is like sticking one's hand in the shower before getting
in: not a precise measure of reliabillity, but a good way not to get
burned.)
Students should be aware
that Wikipedia is a dynamic, constantly mutating resource.
Even if it is appropriate to cite it as a reference,
the citation is not fully meaningful unless
it includes the date on which the page was
accessed, which would allow a reader to use
the Wikipedia "history" feature to
look up the specific version of the article
being referenced. Indeed, Wikipedia articles
on some topics change so frequently (even to
the extent of vandals "reverting" to
earlier scandalous misinformation) that a crucial
citation should really include the exact time
of access. (Where citation to a time-stamped
version of an article is desired, one can make
use of the version-specific URLs available
through the time-date links on each article's
history page--e.g., in the link labeled "17:30,
1 April 2007 76" on
the history
page of the article on "George
Washington.")
(Go to Full
Version of this policy statement for additional details
as well as information about how this statement was developed) |