Wikipedia as a Source
Wikipedia has been perhaps one of the most debated sources of information on the Internet. In theory, it's a great idea: anyone can edit the entries. In theory, it's a bad idea: anyone can edit the entries. It was the site that brought into question the accuracy of the Internet. Really, anyone can put up a website. Wikipedia allowed anyone to edit entries, and in theory, lots of people would be keeping an eye on the site so that wrong information would be spoted by at least twenty people in the world and seek to correct the mistake. There are people that will alter the pages for their own ends. For example, a band might consider adding themselves to Wikipedia. All the information should be true; however, one band member might want their group to look good so they slant the entry in their favor. It's no longer an impartial article. A rival band could also come along and edit the page so it has a negative slant. Either way, the information on the page is no longer a solid source of information.
Wikipedia is great for personal knowledge because the pages at least give you a good overview of a topic. It's a good starting point. When I was invited to a larp, I had no idea what I was getting into. I checked out Wikipedia and found a good overview of what Live Action Role Playing was. There were links for me to explore and it was better than throwing "LARP" into Google and crossing my fingers. When I have no clue what someone is talking about when I'm on reference, I turn to Wikipedia first. Sometimes it's hard for patrons to describe a topic and Wikipedia usually starts with a quick blurb that I can rephrase to make sure that I'm getting at least the concept right. After checking the links at the bottom, I jump into a search engine armed with a direction and maybe some key terms if I need some clarification.
For professional education purposes, Wikipedia shouldn't be used. If you've got hundreds of years of Shakespeare criticism, there's no need to use Wikipedia as a source. If it's about something relatively unknown like someone's garage band that hasn't quite made it yet and has no website, well, maybe the Wikipedia wouldn't be as bad. A little questionable, but sometimes it's one of maybe two sources when the teacher is asking for five sources. You get desperate and turn to Wikipedia, but it's also the most concise quote you'll find on a topic sometimes. If lots of people are looking something over, the article gets refined to the point where it's actually informative and a melding of several larger sources that take five pages to say what one clever editor has crammed into two sentences.
Wikipedia is not the best source of information available, but it is certainly a nice place to begin. It's a collective community of knowledge that brings people together. It's not always accurate, but in theory, lots of people with edit articles until they are.
