"A False Wikipedia 'Biography'" and "Wikipedia: A 'Work in Progress'"

"A False Wikipedia 'Biography'"
"Wikipedia: A 'Work in Progress'"

Students who were assigned these two readings should reply to this blog post with at least two substantive paragraphs responding to any or all of these questions:

1. What do these articles make you think about knowledge and credibility?
2. What does the Seigenthaler episode make you think about who gets to determine the truth?
3. How does this incident shape what you think about sources in and out of an academic context?

Wikipedia Faults

When looking at these two articles, it's hard to known who to believe about knowledge and who's knowledge is credible. This is an example of how the internet makes it hard for students (and anothers looking for information) to believe whats been posted on websites. Things like this don't just make me nervous about what I read on the internet, but I also become skeptical of "printed" information as well. With accidents like this one people should always cross reference at least once, if not more.
The Wikipedia web-site is concerning, because of the fact that anyone can visit the site and put articles in or add to article that already exist. And when certain people have this power they're not looking for the truth, but just writing what entertains themselves. In a way I can sort-of see how Wikipedia may become a valid sorce for information. The goal of Wikipedia is to someday be similar to other encyclopedias. The founder says, that Wikipedia is a work in progess. And I can see that, because if you look at the fact that the information was wrong, but then look at the factor that a reader of Wikipedia saw this error and had it removed or changed it shows that Wikipedia is correcting it's errors when they are found. So, maybe in time Wikipedia will be a credable site.

A false Wikipedia 'biography' blog (chanor)

This article hasn't changed much about my thoughts on internet source's credibility. I have always questioned everything I have read on the internet. In high school, my teachers always told me to back up my internet source by checking the site and who wrote the article. I'm not saying that everything on the internet has a chance to be false, but this article proves that some things are not as credible as you might think.

The tough situation that Mr. Seigenthaler had to go through was terrible. What's so bad about it is that the person who wrote that cannot be broght to justice. I wish that Mr. Seigenthaler could find that person and get the revenge that he wants for publicly harming his image. This article shows the one thing wrong with Wikipedia, that if someone wanted to, they could write something false and get away with it.

"false wikipedia biography" (cburgess)

I have never thought twice about citing sources off of the internet. I have always thought that you wouldn't take the time to post something if it wasn't true. I know now that there are people out there priding themselves on what they get by with on these types of sites.

I think that now after that episod has occured that wikipedia is on the right path. I think that you do need a provible and credible background to post a page on a site like wikipedia. I also think that it is a good idea to keep post annomious to readers so that they are not subject to harassment. I also like what there doing regaurding comments to pages. Where they are, too, annomious to the public but there comments have to screened for there credibilty. In the end though you will not get everyone. Because you have to be intelligent to out smart someone or to get by with comments that aren't true. I would also like to think that you would have to know what is true first.

This leads me to believe that academic contexts should be the background of anyones citings. You should only use something like wikipedia to point in the direction of information that is worth citing.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.