The article is basically challenging whether or not Wikipedia is a reliable source for academic research. It gives multiple views and opinions on the subject and provides plenty of examples of why people trust or don’t trust the site. It even provides facts about how the site is formed and maintained.
I did not know that Wikipedia was so fast to correct false facts, but I have always been well aware that it isn’t a completely factual resource all the time.
The reading can easily be applied to a class on research because it really concentrates on verifying what sources are reputable. It is important to know what sources you can rely on.
This article is very relevant to my life because I use Wikipedia on a regular basis. I haven’t always relied on it to be 100% right 100% of the time. It is useful for both academic research and non-academic curiosity. At least once a week my friends and I will call out “Wiki fight!” whenever we don’t agree on some random trivial fact. It is just such an accessible and convenient resource, I can’t say no.
I don’t know of a class that I haven’t at least once turned to Wikipedia to satisfy a serious subject question or just simple curiosity. I remember using it a lot in my dance class to research the history or famous people related to the dance form. I have researched famous writers that my English teachers have casually mentioned in class. I have even used it in a Math class when I was curious about the root of many mathematical terms.
Wikipedia is quick, convenient, and often accurate, so there is no real reason to avidly avoid it all together, but it very important to know how much we can count on it to be completely accurate.
