I have no idea where to post this Miss Moderator. Please feel free to move

1 love


How accurate is Wikipedia?

There is another entrant in the ongoing debate over Wikipedia's accuracy. Thomas Chesney, a Lecturer in Information Systems at the Nottingham University Business School, published the results of his own Wikipedia study in the most recent edition of First Monday, and he came up with a surprising conclusion: experts rate the articles more highly than do non-experts. This is the article's abstract:

Wikipedia is an free, online encyclopaedia which anyone can add content to or edit the existing content of. The idea behind Wikipedia is that members of the general public can add their own personal knowledge, anonymously if they wish. Wikipedia then evolves over time into a comprehensive knowledge base on all things. Its popularity has never been questioned, although its authority has. By its own admission, Wikipedia contains errors. A number of people have tested Wikipedia’s accuracy using destructive methods, i.e. deliberately inserting errors. This has been criticised by Wikipedia. This short study examines Wikipedia’s credibility by asking 258 research staff with a response rate of 21 percent, to read an article and assess its credibility, the credibility of its author and the credibility of Wikipedia as a whole. Staff were either given an article in their own expert domain or a random article. No difference was found between the two group in terms of their perceived credibility of Wikipedia or of the articles’ authors, but a difference was found in the credibility of the articles — the experts found Wikipedia’s articles to be more credible than the non–experts. This suggests that the accuracy of Wikipedia is high. However, the results should not be seen as support for Wikipedia as a totally reliable resource as, according to the experts, 13 percent of the articles contain mistakes.

Read the article here. Arstechnica compares this with Nature's study:

Nature did a highly-publicized comparative study between Wikipedia and the Encyclopedia Britannica last year in which they found that the two were similar in terms of accuracy. Britannica disputed those findings and still claims to offer a more reliable product.

http://www.freedomtodiffer.com/freedom_to_differ/2006/11/how_accurate_is.html

Another article about the accuracy of Wikipedia.



http://www.scribd.com/doc/6375603/How-accurate-is-Wikipedia?

Not very accurate
I noticed this sometime ago, cuz any tom, dick and harry can edit informations on it.

it is not accurate
why do i say this?
i took an exam and searched for the
answers on wikipedia and i failed
pretty badly

Treetop20:

it is not accurate
why do i say this?
i took an exam and searched for the
answers on wikipedia and i failed
pretty badly

Total opposite of you.All my high schools essays and presentations information was looked up on Wikipedia and I passed.Wikipedia is accurate.Teachers used to lie to us students because they wanted for us to search for informations rather than get it from wiki the easiest way.

STEP 1

~Look up theInformation on wikipedia
~COPY AND PASTE THE WANTED INFO IN WORD
~CHANGE A FEW WORDS.PLAGIARISM IS AGAINST THE LAW REMEMBER.
~TYPE YOUR PAPER AND MAKE AN EASY HUNDRED!!