How to Use Wikipedia Wisely

Summary

The video script challenges the common belief that Wikipedia is unreliable due to its open editing policy. It highlights that while Wikipedia can contain errors, a 2005 study found it comparable to Encyclopedia Britannica in accuracy. The script emphasizes Wikipedia's strength in providing up-to-date information and its utility as a source of references for fact-checking. It argues against discouraging students from using Wikipedia, instead advocating for teaching them to use it wisely, especially as a starting point for evaluating online information.

Takeaways

• 📚 Wikipedia is often consulted by professional fact-checkers despite common misconceptions.
• 🔍 A 2005 study found Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britannica had similar error rates in science articles.
• 🔒 Not all Wikipedia pages are editable by the public; many high-traffic entries are locked for editing by experienced users only.
• 🚀 Wikipedia's strength lies in its ability to update and correct information quickly, unlike print encyclopedias.
• 📈 It's important to teach students how to use Wikipedia wisely instead of avoiding it altogether.
• 🔎 Fact-checkers use Wikipedia as a starting point and then delve into the sources cited at the end of articles.
• 🤔 The script challenges the assumption that Wikipedia is less reliable than other sources by highlighting its rigorous referencing.
• 🔗 The references section in Wikipedia articles is a gold mine for fact-checkers and students looking for credible sources.
• ❌ The example of the American College of Pediatricians illustrates how Wikipedia can quickly debunk misleading organizations.
• 🔑 Fact-checking involves cross-referencing multiple sources, and Wikipedia can be a valuable part of this process.

Q & A

Why do some educators advise students against using Wikipedia?

Some educators advise against using Wikipedia because it is editable by anyone, which they believe could lead to a high number of mistakes and unreliable information.

What did the 2005 Nature study find about the accuracy of Wikipedia compared to Encyclopedia Britannica?

The 2005 study found that the typical Wikipedia science article had four mistakes, while the typical Encyclopedia Britannica entry contained three mistakes, suggesting that both sources have similar levels of inaccuracies.

How does Wikipedia differ from a print encyclopedia in terms of updating information?

Wikipedia allows for changes to be made almost immediately, which helps keep the information current, unlike print encyclopedias where updates are less frequent.

Are all Wikipedia pages open for editing by anyone?

No, not all Wikipedia pages are open for editing by anyone. Many of the most viewed entries are locked, meaning that only high-level Wikipedians can change them.

What is the main argument for teaching students to use Wikipedia wisely instead of avoiding it?

The main argument is that Wikipedia is one of the most useful tools on the Internet and can be an invaluable resource if used properly, especially as a starting point for evaluating online information.

What do professional fact-checkers look for when consulting Wikipedia?

Professional fact-checkers look for the sources listed at the end of Wikipedia articles, which can serve as a gold mine of references to verify the information presented.

How can Wikipedia help in identifying the credibility of organizations like the American College of Pediatricians?

Wikipedia can help by providing references that substantiate claims about organizations. For example, it includes a letter from a credible source like Francis S. Collins, which can question the trustworthiness of an organization.

What is the significance of the references required by Wikipedia to substantiate claims?

The references required by Wikipedia are significant because they provide evidence and context for the information in the articles, allowing readers to verify the claims and assess the credibility of the sources.

How can students use Wikipedia as a launching pad for evaluating online information?

Students can use Wikipedia as a launching pad by starting their research there and then following the references to original sources to evaluate the credibility and accuracy of the information.

Why is it important to teach students how to use Wikipedia wisely?

It is important to teach students how to use Wikipedia wisely because it can be a valuable resource for information, but it requires critical evaluation of the sources and understanding of its limitations to ensure the information is reliable.

What is the role of multiple sources in fact-checking using Wikipedia?

The role of multiple sources in fact-checking using Wikipedia is to provide a comprehensive and cross-verified view of the information. Fact-checkers do not rely on a single source but examine multiple sources to ensure the accuracy of the information.

Outlines

00:00

📚 The Misunderstanding of Wikipedia's Reliability

The paragraph discusses the common misconception that Wikipedia is unreliable due to the possibility of anyone editing its content and the presence of errors. However, it challenges this view by pointing out that professional fact-checkers often consult Wikipedia as a first step in their research. A 2005 study from Nature is cited, which found that Wikipedia's science articles contained an average of four errors, compared to three in Encyclopedia Britannica articles. The paragraph emphasizes Wikipedia's ability to update information quickly and the fact that not all pages are editable by the public, with many high-traffic pages being locked to edits by experienced Wikipedia contributors. The narrator suggests that instead of discouraging students from using Wikipedia, educators should teach them how to use it effectively, particularly by examining the sources listed at the end of articles. An example is given where a quick Wikipedia search can reveal the questionable credibility of the American College of Pediatricians, as evidenced by a letter from the head of the National Institute of Health, Francis S. Collins, which is found in the references. The paragraph concludes by advocating for the use of Wikipedia as a valuable resource for initial research and fact-checking, especially when used as a starting point for further investigation.

Keywords

💡Wikipedia

Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia that allows anyone to create and edit content, making it a dynamic and collaborative source of information. In the video, it is presented as a resource that, despite common misconceptions about its reliability, can be a valuable tool for students when used wisely. The video argues against the blanket advice to avoid Wikipedia, suggesting instead that it should be taught as a starting point for research, with an emphasis on evaluating the sources it cites.

💡Mistakes

The term 'mistakes' in the context of the video refers to inaccuracies or errors found within informational content. It is used to address concerns about the reliability of Wikipedia, comparing it to the traditional Encyclopedia Britannica. The video suggests that while Wikipedia may contain mistakes, so do other respected sources, and the key is in how these mistakes are managed and corrected.

💡Fact checkers

Fact checkers are individuals or organizations that verify the accuracy of information, often in media or publications. The video highlights that professional fact checkers often consult Wikipedia as part of their research process, indicating that it can be a useful resource if approached critically. The video encourages students to adopt a similar approach, using Wikipedia as a starting point and then verifying information through the sources provided.

💡Encyclopedia Britannica

Encyclopedia Britannica is a well-established, traditional print encyclopedia that serves as a point of comparison in the video to Wikipedia. It is mentioned to show that even authoritative sources can contain errors, suggesting that the presence of mistakes is not unique to Wikipedia and that the focus should be on how information is verified and updated.

💡Edit

In the context of the video, 'edit' refers to the process of making changes or corrections to content on Wikipedia. The video points out that not all pages on Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, and that high-traffic or controversial entries are often 'locked' to prevent vandalism, requiring higher levels of user status to make changes. This process is part of Wikipedia's mechanism to maintain accuracy and reliability.

💡High level Wikipedians

High level Wikipedians are experienced users of the platform who have earned the right to edit certain pages due to their contributions and adherence to Wikipedia's policies. The video uses this term to explain that there are checks and balances within Wikipedia's editing process, with trusted users having the ability to make changes to high-visibility articles.

💡Current

The term 'current' in the video refers to the up-to-date nature of information on Wikipedia. Unlike print encyclopedias, which are static once published, Wikipedia allows for continuous updates, making it a potentially more reliable source for the latest information. The video emphasizes the importance of using current information in research and learning.

💡Sources

Sources in the context of the video are the references and citations provided at the end of Wikipedia articles to support the claims made within them. The video suggests that the value of Wikipedia lies not only in the information presented but in the sources it links to, which can be used to verify and explore topics in greater depth.

💡American College of Pediatricians

The American College of Pediatricians is mentioned in the video as an example of an organization that might appear authoritative but is not the main representative body for pediatricians in the United States. The video uses this example to show how quickly Wikipedia can be scanned to reveal the true nature of such organizations, and how the sources cited can provide further evidence.

💡Francis S. Collins

Francis S. Collins is the head of the National Institute of Health, and his name is used in the video as an example of a credible source that can be found in Wikipedia's references. The video describes how a letter from Collins condemning the American College of Pediatricians for misrepresenting his research was cited in Wikipedia, demonstrating the importance of checking sources for accuracy.

💡Online information

Online information refers to the vast array of data and knowledge available on the internet. The video emphasizes the importance of evaluating online information critically, using Wikipedia as a starting point for research but always cross-referencing and verifying information through multiple sources to ensure its reliability.

Highlights

Wikipedia is often consulted by professional fact checkers despite common misconceptions.

A 2005 study found Wikipedia science articles had an average of four mistakes, similar to Encyclopedia Britannica's three.

Wikipedia allows for immediate changes and current information, unlike print encyclopedias.

Many high-traffic Wikipedia pages are locked and can only be edited by experienced Wikipedians.

Educators should teach students how to use Wikipedia wisely instead of avoiding it.

Fact checkers use Wikipedia as a starting point for evaluating online information.

Wikipedia's references at the end of articles are a gold mine for fact-checking.

Wikipedia can quickly reveal the credibility of organizations, such as the American College of Pediatricians.

References on Wikipedia can lead to official statements, such as one from Francis S. Collins, questioning certain groups' credibility.

Fact checkers examine multiple sources, not just one, to ensure accuracy.

Wikipedia is an invaluable resource when used properly, especially for launching further research.

The importance of teaching students to critically evaluate information found on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia's dynamic nature allows for the correction of mistakes and updating of information.

The contrast between Wikipedia's editable nature and the static nature of print encyclopedias.

The role of high-level Wikipedians in maintaining the quality of the most viewed entries.

The potential of Wikipedia as an educational tool when used with discernment.

The necessity to shift from avoiding Wikipedia to learning how to use it effectively.

The value of Wikipedia's comprehensive referencing system in verifying claims.

Transcripts

(upbeat music)

- [Narrator] Many educators tell students

they shouldn't use Wikipedia

because it's full of mistakes and anybody can edit a page.

If that's the case, then why in our observations

of professional fact checkers was Wikipedia one

of the first sites they often consulted.

It's true that there are mistakes in Wikipedia.

A 2005 study from Nature found

that the typical Wikipedia science article had four mistakes

but the same study found that the typical

Encyclopedia Britannica entry contained three mistakes.

In contrast to a print encyclopedia,

Wikipedia allows for changes to be made almost immediately

and for information to be kept current

and it's not true that anyone can edit any Wikipedia page.

Many of the most viewed entries are locked which means that

only high level Wikipedians can change them.

To tell students not to use Wikipedia is to deprive them

of one of the most useful tools on the Internet.

Instead of teaching them to avoid it,

we should be teaching students how to use Wikipedia wisely.

When fact checkers go to Wikipedia,

they scan the body of an article

but what they are really looking for is the gold mine

of sources at the end of the article.

For example, the American College of Pediatricians has

an official sounding name and logo.

It's easy to think that it's the main organization

of pediatricians in the country but even a quick scan

of Wikipedia shows that not to be the case.

But the real evidence comes at the bottom

in the references Wikipedia requires

in substantiating a claim.

In a matter of seconds students can find

in these references a letter from Francis S. Collins,

the head of the National Institute of Health,

condemning this small group

for misrepresenting his research findings.

This brings the trustworthiness

of the American College of Pediatricians into question.

And fact checkers don't just examined one source.

They look at multiple sources.

Used properly Wikipedia is an invaluable resource

especially as a launching pad

for evaluating online information.

We need to teach students how to use it wisely.