Search results
- Wikipedia is not a trusted academic source, nor considered scholarly. Although Wikipedia is now known as a bad source to use for your paper, you can use Wikipedia as a starting point to gather a general understanding of a subject, then organize your ideas and start looking for detailed sources to support your research.
u.osu.edu › tan-948/2021/04 › 18
People also ask
Should you use Wikipedia as a credible resource?
Is Wikipedia a credible platform for citing research?
Is Wikipedia a good source for research?
Is Wikipedia a reliable source?
Jan 24, 2024 · Wikipedia has moved far beyond its initial limitations, and is now a helpful—and reputable—source for conducting research.
- Mike Caulfield
research papers may not be considered acceptable, because Wikipedia is not a. creditable source. This can be avoided by following two simple rules: Do your research assignment properly. Remember that any. encyclopedia is a starting point for research, not an ending point. An encyclopedia is great for getting a general understanding of a.
- Types of Sources
- How to Identify A Credible Source
- The CRAAP Test
- Where to Find Credible Sources
- Evaluating Web Sources
- Other Interesting Articles
There are many different types of sources, which can be divided into three categories: primary sources, secondary sources, and tertiary sources. Primary sources are often considered the most credible in terms of providing evidence for your argument, as they give you direct evidence of what you are researching. However, it’s up to you to ensure the ...
There are a few criteria to look at right away when assessing a source. Together, these criteria form what is known as the CRAAP test.
The CRAAP testis a catchy acronym that will help you evaluate the credibility of a source you are thinking about using. California State University developed it in 2004 to help students remember best practices for evaluating content. The criteria for evaluating each point depend on your research topic. For example, if you are researching cutting-ed...
What sources you use depend on the kind of research you are conducting. For preliminary research and getting to know a new topic, you could use a combination of primary, secondary, and tertiary sources. As you dig deeper into your scholarly research, books and academic journals are usually your best bet. Academic journals are often a great place to...
It can be especially challenging to verify the credibility of online sources. They often do not have single authors or publication dates, and their motivation can be more difficult to ascertain. Websites are not subject to the peer-review and editing process that academic journals or books go through, and can be published by anyone at any time. Whe...
If you want to know more about ChatGPT, AI tools, citation, and plagiarism, make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.
- Content Manager
- Scribbr
Research studies have shown that Wikipedia is roughly as reliable as other sources commonly accepted as “accurate.” Arguably, the one to demonstrate this first was science journalist Jim Giles, who wrote a 2005 Nature article, “ Internet encyclopaedias go head to head .”
Sep 22, 2021 · Wikipedia is a great resource to mine for keywords to use in your research. Pay attention to words in headings, in bold, or marked as hyperlinks. Pay attention as you read through the article and take note of terminology specific to the subject, or even just words that get used or repeated often.
- Kevin Enns-Rempel
- 2017
Misconceptions & Benefits. Wikipedia —the world’s largest reference website—is broadly misunderstood. Because it is written by thousands of anonymous volunteers around the world, Wikipedia generates uncertainty or skepticism in many. If just anyone can change Wikipedia, won’t there be inaccuracies? Won’t people potentially abuse that power?
Feb 21, 2022 · As Wikipedia’s stated aim if for its sources to verifiable, he argues openness should be central to the use of research on Wikipedia. There has (too) long been a debate as to Wikipedia’s relationship with academia and whether the former is a credible platform for sharing and citing research.
