Why do some college professors forbid students to use wikipedia?

Question

the past couple years, I've been hearing more of my professors instruct students to not use it- that is is 'unverifiable junk' in many cases.

is this true? I thought it was reputable.

Answer 1

About as reputable as any other encyclopedia.  But it's not a primary source, so if you're actually doing a research project it's not a good place to get all your info from - but maybe a good place to start.  Some of my professors actually recommend it - it's pretty good for an introduction to a lot of the sciences, but a few fields are starting their own wiki projects with experts writing the articles.

Answer 2

Your professors are just jealous because the stuff that they went to school for years and years to learn is stuff you can look up in a couple of minutes with a few mouse clicks.  In my field I have seen relatively little in wikipedia that is inaccurate.  Some of it is rather shallow, but you don't use an encyclopedia for depth.

Answer 3

The public is able to edit Wikipedia, meaning that false or biased information could end up in there and could consequently end up in your research and then in your term paper.  

Answer 4

it is not reliable since anyone in the world can contribute

Answer 5

My professors tell me that Wikipedia should only be used when you several other reliable sources that backup the info that you got from there. And also anyone in the world can write anything they want on Wikipedia whether it's true or false.  

Answer 6

yea my teachers in highschool tell us that its not accurate when, in most cases ive found it to be very accurate.  The only thing bad about it is that anyone can edit it with wrong information and it could be false.  I wouldn't use it for all my research but if i wanted to find something out quickly i might search on wikipedia.  But for a project of extreme importance, i wouldn't take the chance w/ wikipedia.  

Answer 7

I'm a college professor who allows my students to use wikipedia as a supplement to other sources. However, many of my colleagues do not allow the resource since it is secondary and non peer-reviewed. That means the information is generally not as reliable.

I suggest using wikipedia to get a quick overview of a given topic area. Some authors on wiki also put references at the end of their entry. You can usually look us these sources online and use them instead. It makes for a strong case when you're incorporating empirical research and primary theory.

Answer 8

Eh, most of the time it's true, but the fact is - anyone can edit it. They might put something they think to be true and something that's very realistic that is not in fact true. So that's why

Answer 9

Because anybody could write something in WIkipedia. If I really want to, I could write something about myself and claim i am the worlds smartest individual. So if someone is researching on who is the smartest individual in world, they would think i am the smartest. (this is just an example)

My professors say the same thing.