Thanks for raising this issue, Ken. I had heard about defamation and inaccuracy, but wasn't aware of those recent cases. It's really useful to know what other universities' policies are on this. Our department has recently instated a similar prohibition against using the Wikipedia as a source in student papers. Our line has been that the Wikipedia is one of many useful places to start doing research on a topic, but that it is rarely valid as a final source for research. Many articles do provide good overviews and more importantly, they often link to primary sources which CAN be good, citable resources in student papers. There are cases when it is appropriate to cite a Wikipedia article - for instance if writing a paper ABOUT the Wikipedia, or about a topic that is developing and where it is interesting to cite changing Wikipedia articles. In such cases students are told they need to include a discussion of why it's appropriate to use the Wikipedia. Our prohibition has been partly due to the uneven quality of various subject areas coverage in the Wikipedia - some (particularly new and developing areas with a lot of online resources and activity) are wonderfully covered, with far better articles than The Britannica, for instance, but others (like electronic literature) are very partially and not always accurately presented. Another reason is simply that Wikipedia citations in student papers are usually so lazy - students tend to use them when they haven't bothered to either do a little more research to find primary sources or when they haven't bothered to write their own summaries of papers and books that are on the curriculum and they are supposed to have read. I don't think encyclopedias of any kind should be primary sources for most student work. I'll continue contributing to the Wikipedia, when I have time - I think it's wonderful, but usually not an authoritative source for research papers or student papers. And having said all this: despite the Wikipedia prohibition being repeated in lectures, we continue to get citations in paper after paper... Most students, it appears, would far rather cut and paste from the Wikipedia than do their own work. Jill Dr Jill Walker, Dept of Humanistic Informatics, University of Bergen, Norway
Dear Colleagues,
This letter is a suggestion that you address the problem of bad information in student papers from an increasingly poor source: Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not getting better. It is getting worse. One reason for this is the apparent case that the status of Wikipedia as a much-used reference resource makes it the target of opportunity for hoax efforts that would never enter an edited reference text.
There are now enough serious incidents of false and defamatory information in Wikipedia biographies to warrant prohibiting this as a reference source in universities and university-level professional schools. The same is true of inaccurate or false assertions in many articles.
The problem with Wikipedia is not that the Wiki system MAY develop a solid and reliable reference work, but that in the current form, it DOES NOT. It is as easy to change an article for the worse as for the better.
Nearly any university student today has access to a decent library and good on-line reference texts. In addition, anyone willing to search a bit will also fine outstanding SIGNED references sources by major scholars in many fields, as well as useful albeit older versions of respected references source no longer covered by copyright.
The current scandal concerning a false and defamatory biography of Robert Kennedy aide and friend John Siegenthaler (see below) and similar recent cases lead me to conclude that Wikipedia has no way to prevent problems like this from happening. This is made worse by the fact that Wikipedia is an automatic flow-through resource for other on-line sources.
Wikipedia is unacceptable as a research tool.
I have informed my students that they may no longer use Wikipedia as a reference or source on papers in my courses. I urge you to consider a similar statement. While Wikipedia may be a useful first step in seeking information, I no longer accept it as a credible source. Therefore, I advise students to look further when a project requires a reliable source.
Use of Wikipedia by students and researchers is an important validation mechanism for Wikipedia.
If enough of us prohibit Wikipedia as a reference source in our courses, programs, and schools, the message will eventually get through.
When it does, Wikipedia will find an appropriate way to monitor contributions. If they do not, the reputation of Wikipedia will sink to that of another crank web site.
Yours,
Ken Friedman
The Siegenthaler case in the New York Times and USA Today via Yahoo:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/04/weekinreview/04seelye.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20051130/cm_usatoday/ afalsewikipediabiography
--
Ken Friedman Professor of Leadership and Strategic Design Institute for Communication, Culture, and Language Norwegian School of Management
Design Research Center Denmark's Design School
email: ken.friedman@bi.no _______________________________________________ The air-l@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http:// listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/