Reading Report 2

“Can Wikipedia Ever Make the Grade?"
by Brock Read
Chronicle of Higher Education

This article discusses the validity of the information on Wikipedia. The beginning of the article discusses Mr. Halavais, an assistant professor who tried to plant thirteen errors on Wikipedia. He did this as a test and found that within 3 hours all of the errors had been corrected. The article then talks about how accurate Wikipedia is. A study was done to compare the content on Wikipedia to the content in the Encyclopedia Britannia. The study found that on average Wikipedia had on one more error than the Encyclopedia Britannia. The article then goes on to discuss the issues scholars have with Wikipedia. They believe that Wikipedia is not getting expertise and that any average Joe with no intellect could post or edit a topic. Then in an interview with the co founder of Wikipedia he said that they have been doing a lot to prevent misleading information. They have editors who regularly check the validity of the information post and they are now requiring that in order to create a topic or post you must be a registered member of Wikipedia.

I personally think Wikipedia is a good resource. I think that the study done showing that on average Wikipedia has only one more error than a written encyclopedia proves that it is a valid resource. I use Wikipedia and have never had a problem with it. It is definitely reassuring to know that there are editors that check for false information and delete it if necessary. This article has shown me however that there are errors in the information Wikipedia provides and that I need to be care and somewhat skeptical if it is on a subject I am unfamiliar with. They best way over all I believe to make sure the information you are getting off of Wikipedia is to find more sources. If you put in the work and keep finding sources that say the same thing than the odds are that the information on Wikipedia is correct.