These days Wikipedia is far from the only encyclopedia online, although it is the most well-known. Most traditional encyclopedias are now online as well, some, such as the Encyclopaedia Britannica, exclusively so. A main point to consider when selecting an encyclopedia to use is its quality.
The information in the encyclopedia needs to be reliable and accurate. Traditional reference works have an advantage here, right? The answer might surprise you. There have been a number of studies demonstrating that Wikipedia has a similar level of quality to traditional reference works. One investigation by the Nature editorial team showed that, on average, articles on academic topics in Wikipedia only had one more error per entry than articles in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, which had three errors on average.
A study from even found that Wikipedia was more reliable than the Encyclopaedia Britannica. However, this study was carried out by the Wikimedia Foundation, the organization behind Wikipedia.
This can lead to new ideas for your project. A study from suggests that Wikipedia is indeed a source of inspiration, at least for scientists. If new scientific content is added to a Wikipedia article, it appears to influence the topic being written about more in peer-reviewed journals. It helps to read critically and ask yourself the following questions:. Make sure to always try to obtain the original source instead of just citing a quotation as it was written in Wikipedia.
A study from has shown that Wikipedia is being cited more and more often as a direct source. The authors see this as an indication that Wikipedia is gaining acceptance as a reliable and credible source.
Create a free Team What is Teams? Learn more. What's the name of Wikipedia's default referencing style? Ask Question. Asked 8 years, 9 months ago. Active 6 years, 10 months ago. Viewed 15k times. Improve this question. Aubrey 2, 1 1 gold badge 13 13 silver badges 18 18 bronze badges.
Josh Pinto Josh Pinto 2 2 gold badges 3 3 silver badges 8 8 bronze badges. Did you mean "English Wikipedia"? Or are you really asking of the whole wikipedia. In the example above, for instance, it was not possible to determine when the specific section of the website was last updated. Only the date of access is given. APA: Martin, G. A few more last words [Weblog post]. In these cases, see the discussion of Private Websites , and use the same care when evaluating the material you access.
But blogs are increasingly included as a feature of organization websites Amazon. Even when hosted by a recognized organization, most blogs should probably be treated as popular rather than scholarly sources.
This information might be considered analogous to the organization that sponsors an organization website. But in some cases, it may not be necessary to give the site sponsor. When deciding whether to include the site sponsor, use your judgment: if the blog pursues a theme in common with the sponsor, list the sponsor.
The formats below cover the most common ways to cite video clips that were published online on sites like YouTube and Vimeo. Video that was first published elsewhere but accessed online on sites like Netflix and Hulu is cited differently. See the notes that follow for more information. YouTube, 23 Sept. Philip Zimbardo: The psychology of evil [Video file]. Retrieved Aug. Booker, J [jbook]. Like other film and video formats, conventions for citing online video are less fixed than those for print or other kinds of online sources.
The citation for a video clip that was first published online typically attributes the clip to the individual who posted it on the Internet. Video that was first published elsewhere before being posted online, is usually attributed to the individuals most responsible for making it—the director or performers.
For example, a film that is released online or an ongoing web series, may be more accurately attributed to the director or actors than the person who uploaded it to the Internet. MLA: Levy, Michael. APA: Levy, M. Re: your canon?
Retrieved June 26, from sfra-l wiz. There are many electronic forums that allow users with a specific interest or affiliation to discuss topics with each other. Some of these are restricted to members of a group, or of a specific course.
Many Yale courses, for instance, provide forum discussions through the Classesv2 server. Other such discussions are open to any interested party. Although discussions limited to professionals in a field may be more authoritative, in general you should probably treat material from these forums as popular rather than scholarly sources. Note: Many such forums expect communications to be private. Follow that with the most specific identifying information you can give about the particular post.
Depending on the type of discussion, there may be subject headings or specific message numbers on a given post. You may or may not be able to tell the posting date. In MLA style, include the name of the sponsoring forum. Since most of these discussions do not supervise postings, do not put the sponsor name in italics. Follow this with the date you accessed the material.
Even when membership is restricted to a particular organization, most listervs should probably be treated as popular rather than scholarly sources.
The last item in your listing—the electronic address—brings up one point on which MLA and APA styles differ starkly: in APA, if the posting cannot be retrieved, you cite it in your paper as a personal communication and do not include it in your list of References. Try to include the archive address. MLA: Donahue, Tiane. APA: Do not include in list of References. Cite in your paper as a personal communication. Note: Chicago style footnotes give full information for private messages, but does not list them in the Bibliography.
And even in these cases, the informality of email makes most authors much less careful about checking facts and conclusions, rendering the information less authoritative. Most email messages should probably be treated as popular rather than scholarly sources. Note: Most people consider email to be private. If you received the message as a forward, the obligation to seek permission is even more urgent, as the original author likely has no reason to expect you to use the message in your own work.
If you use email in your paper, cite it as a personal communication in your text, and do not list it at the end. For Chicago style, private messages are given full citation in a footnote, but not included in the Bibliography. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. APA: King Arthur. In Wikipedia. To list material from Wikipedia, you should review the advice for organization websites. But Wikipedia merits additional attention because of its recent growth and popularity.
Some professors will warn you not to use Wikipedia because they believe its information is unreliable. As a community project with no central review committee, Wikipedia certainly contains its share of incorrect information and uninformed opinion.
Is this article helpful? He writes and edits for Scribbr, and reads a lot of books in his spare time. Other students also liked. Primary and secondary sources Primary sources provide raw information and first-hand evidence. Secondary sources interpret, analyze or summarize primary sources.
Follow our examples to cite correctly in every style. Common knowledge: to cite or not to cite? Common knowledge refers to information that most people know. Is your statement considered common knowledge? Take the test! Still have questions?
0コメント