Paper due tomorrow. You don’t have a single inkling as to what Transcendentalism is. What do you do? Easy.
1. Click on the URL bar
2. Type in google.com (or Bing for all you bingers out there or whatever search engine suits you best)
3. In the search bar type t_r_a_n_s_c_e_n_d_e_n_t_a_l_i_s_m and press enter
4. In the first three or four results will be Transcendentalism – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
5. Click on this link and voila, now in front of you is the beginnings of your knowledge regarding the topic
Now, this isn’t a how-to on the methodology of using Google, Wikipedia, or any other website. Far from it. This is a demonstration depicting what the vast majority of people do on the internet to find information about a topic, person, or other matter. It is remarkable how Wikipedia has transformed the pathology of research and obtaining new knowledge. The marketing and logistical effort by the organization/website is beyond remarkable; especially considering the extent and lengths it has gone to.
Look at the past couple days and imagine the impact Wikipedia’s 24-hour blackout has had on your life. Did you panic without being able to find that piece of information? Did you just go to an alternative website to find the information? Or, did you read up and try to figure out what was going on and why Wikipedia was blacked out? Probably the latter. It truly has become ingrained into our lifestyles and methodology regarding the retrieval of information and knowledge.
A few years ago, the stigma attached to Wikipedia seemed insurmountable. Teachers, administrators, and scholars had placed a vendetta on the website. Were they right? Partially. Information could be submitted to the website regarding just about anything. This led to both odd pages and odd bits of information found within topics that didn’t seem to fit; even some inaccuracies were included. Often if you check the citation for an item on Wikipedia, it is word for word from that source. These questionable practices have resulted in a standoff throughout the years.
However, now we are past that. Wikipedia has easily replaced traditional encyclopedias. How has it done this? The expansion of the internet into everyday life, Wikipedia’s own tireless effort to encompass all subjects, and their webpage often being the first result when utilizing search engines has meant that the public has literally been force fed. This access to such a vast amount of information has not only astonished the public, but also taken it by storm. It is here to stay as well (unless government intervention and limitations has a say).
Onto the larger topic and prevailing question in all our minds. Is Wikipedia a valid source to look for accurate information and what is academia’s take on it? I do not pretend to speak for either Wikipedia or ‘Academia’ but more than likely scholars use or are at least acquainted with Wikipedia. Do not confuse this with approval. Many teachers and professors think Wikipedia is a great website to start research on a subject or for a paper, but is not the end-all-be-all when it comes to that research. It should be treated as a starting point where the information can be used to point in directions toward other more scholarly articles, authors, and journals. In other words, the only think they dislike about the website is when it shows up at the bottom of or end to a research paper. Don’t cite Wikipedia in your research article. To reiterate, it shows a lack of effort and disrespect for peers and teachers. In this way you can gain great leads for your works and stay in the graces of those who most likely go to Wikipedia first to see if that material was used.
Scholars and academia may frown or remain uncertain of Wikipedia because the knowledge it provides is at its best basic and simple in its meaning and intentions. Wikipedia seeks to bring knowledge to the public, not answer or resolve dilemmas that even scholars themselves dispute and complicate with alternative methods and significance. Often the information provided comes from submitters that should not be considered experts in their field, and sometimes have little knowledge of the field at all! Academia must come to terms with the website much like the public is now coming to terms with the internet and newer technologies. Markets and lifestyles must be rearranged and adjusted to provide for newer technologies. It is a matter of acclimation and coming to terms with a new source of readily available information.
The amount of information that can now be found on the web is incredible. Wikipedia is not the only source, but it is one of the largest and most renowned. If you plan on utilizing the information provided there, I only ask that you question the validity of it much like you should question any information you come upon on the web or even in person. Use common sense and if all else fails hit up the library and open up one of those big encyclopedias! They sure are fun to go through!
*This is an Opinion piece...take my words for what they are...just words
~ Kaptica
