Wikipedia changes the way students, professors think about research over decade in existence
Ten years ago, the world was introduced to user-generated encyclopedia Wikipedia.
This provoked a change in the world of reference sources — and the people who use them — that continues to this day, said Timothy Peters, director of information services at off-campus library services.
“Years ago librarians were wary because it was not a traditional source,” Peters said. “It’s gotten much better over the years. When the Internet first came out it was just whatever people with computers wanted to put on there.”
Wikipedia should be treated like any other source, Peters said. People should look at the sources the author cites and see if they did their homework.
Even people who use reference books should make sure the author is citing prominent thinkers in the field, said Chris Owens, assistant professor of political science, and using Wikipedia today is like using an encyclopedia was when he was in college.
“If you write a paper and it only has Wikipedia cites you’re going to get a bad grade,” he said. “There are plenty of electronic books and journals you can use.”
Owens said the source is useful for finding background on a topic but should be avoided for anything deeper. Novi sophomore Joe Betro uses Wikipedia for just that.
"I do (use it) in my reports, not to quote Wikipedia, but to find other reliable sources," Betro said. "Most of my professors actually tell me to use it ... as a jumping off point."
Assistant History Professor Randy Doyle uses Wikipedia for photographs and the appropriate spelling of vocabulary terms in his HST 369: Traditional China class.
“I don’t use it as an intellectual source... because it does have limitations,” he said. “(But) dealing with Asian history, the vast majority of students I’ve encountered in ten years haven’t known (the language's) spelling.”
Some people may have problems with Wikipedia because they think the content takes a more liberal view of current events, Doyle said.
It is up to each professor whether they allow Wikipedia as a source, Peters said. Owens and Doyle do not allow their students to use the site as a source.
But the model for Wikipedia is having an impact on more traditional encyclopedias, he said. Even the Encyclopedia Britannica has a method for people to submit their own content.
“The other websites that deal with encyclopedic knowledge ... follow the Wikipedia model,” he said. “The problem with Wikipedia is that it’s kind of known as the people’s encyclopedia.”
Even in Wikipedia's early days some of its articles were superior to traditional sources, Peters said. When he was reading about the Ogallala Aquifer, an aquifer which provides water for parts of the great plains, the Wikipedia page was appeared credible and provided more information than a traditional encyclopedia.
“(Wikipedia) would probably be 15 pages printed out with charts and graphs and maps,” he said. “Someone who needed information about the Ogallala Aquifer would be better served by going to Wikipedia.”
Peters likened most Wikipedia pages to study aids like CliffsNotes in that they both provide valuable background information but should not be a final source for any type of research.
