Valid Source?

Throughout a students journey through education they are bombarded with assignments. Of these assignments, one of the most dreaded is the essay. A factor that makes this assignment so difficult, especially in the more advances stages of the journey through education is finding valid and accepted sources for essays. Some of the largest sources, most accessible, and possibly even the easiest to use are “wikis” such as Wikipedia. Unfortunately for students, in most cases, these wikis are not considered a valid source. The question has been asked should students be allowed to use these wikis as a source for their work? Considering that a wiki allows anyone to put information on the site and edit that information and that these articles on wiki databases are not peer reviewed, wiki sites should not be considered a valid source for students to cite.

The first and primary reason that wiki sites should not be considered a legitimate source is that anyone who desires to write something can. In face they can write anything they wish to. Theodore Schick Jr. and Lewis Vaughn, authors of How to Think About Weird Things, state that “’Everybody’s entitled to their own opinion’ goes the platitude, meaning that everybody has the right to believe whatever they want. But is that really true? Are there no limits to what is permissible to believe?”(71) Yes, it is true that these writings will be edited, but the same goes for the editing, anyone can edit in whatever fashion they see fit. For example, on the Wikipedia website, on the top left corner of the main page is a link that reads “editing”, from this link anyone who desires to can edit any article they would like to, all they have to do is have an account. Now this might seem like a great way to maintain knowledgeable authors until you click the bright blue link that reads, “create account“. After clicking this link, all one has to do is come up with a creative username, a password, retype that password, and provide an email address, however, the email address is optional. With this a viewer can easily tell that this process is hardly one that qualifies a person to become an author for a so-called valid encyclopedia. Speaking of this, Jim Green of AssociatedContent.com says, “Considering that anyone with an ideological axe to grind and a smattering of writing ability can spin falsehoods on Wikipedia without challenge from the site's editors, clearly it should not be referenced as a valid source for factual information.”

The second reason is that the most credible sources that students can find and use are those that are peer-reviewed. Peer reviewed simply means that someone who is an expert in the field that is being discussed reviews or examines the writing to determine if it has the credentials to be a valid source. Katherine Brind’ Amour of the Academic Writing Suite states, “The most credible types of publications are peer-reviewed journals, official government publications (including census information), and books from peer-reviewed or reputable publishing companies (think Oxford, Harvard, or Yale University presses). Wiki cites are far from peer reviewed or from being considered as a parallel to Harvard or Yale as sources to find credible information. Keeping in mind that for a source to be valid it needs to give confidence to the reader, Wikipedia is by no means valid. A person simply does not and should not get the same feeling of security and credibility when reading something from a wiki cite as they do reading information from a renown university or other source.

Obviously the creators of wiki cites along with their frequent users have a different opinion. The co-founder of Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales, describes it as “an effort to create and distribute a multilingual free encyclopedia of the highest quality to every single person on the planet in his or her own language.” Wikipedia exists to bring knowledge to everyone who seeks it”. There is no doubt that these cites are very productive and efficient. They offer limitless information and in an extremely accessible manner. A large portion of the information is probably very factual and credible, however, this in no way meets the standards set by Mr. Wales quotes saying Wikipedia is “of the highest quality”, nor does it meet the standards that need to be met by students in order to have quality essays based on valid and credible sources.

In conclusion, wiki cites are undoubtedly extremely valuable tools. These cites are effective tools that can provide information in a productive and efficient way. However, wiki cites simply do not meet the requirements that are set for student’s and their sources. The fact that anyone can write anything they feel like and call it a fact on these cites, along with wiki cites being far from peer-reviewed demonstrates that wiki cites are not reliable for students to use. These cites simply do not instill the necessary confidence in the reader about the source they are reading.