I used to believe Wikipedia was simply a good place to go and find sources for more topics that I’m interested in, but now I’m more inclined to believe that it really can be somewhat reliable for information depending on the article that you’re reading. Articles with more traffic are going to be more closely monitored and better policed to make sure no misinformation is spread. In the last reading I noted in my annotations and in class that over the years Wikipedia has developed a peer review program where other users all determine the validity of an article which is very encouraging to see. I’m really glad that in this day and age Wikipedia is seen as more reliable then it was during my younger years in school. During my time in middles school and even in high school we were discouraged from even looking on Wikipedia. It wasn’t until I got into junior college, that I had a professor encourage me to go on Wikipedia, he said that it’s a great way to find good primary and secondary sources for topics I’m interested in. Since then I’ve used wikipedia religiously in order to find more information about topics that I’ve wanted to research, it really has come in very handy. I don’t agree with calling it a ‘utopia’ since it’s far from perfect, even with measures in place since it’s humans maintaining it, there’s going to be some inherent bias in what’s written. However, just like most things in the world, you have to look at the good and bad, pros and cons and judge for yourself. If no for Wikipedia offering free information and gateways to fostering a love of history, I wouldn’t be where I am, so I’m always going to have a very healthy appreciation for the mission they are trying to undertake.
Leave a Reply