User:Acampbell3445/sandbox

Wikipedia Critique

Going into this class I was somewhat knowledgeable about Wikipedia and its policies. I knew that Wikipedia was credible and trustworthy. However the extent to just how meticulous Wikipedia is in regards to the credibility of the information on their site. That blew me away primarily they require sources for almost all the information editors upload. In addition to that every paragraph requires a source. Moreover there no nonsense stance regarding paganism and paraphrasing is top notch. In order words if you breach the copyright law. Your article will be flagged and taken down.

Furthermore it’s Just the quantity of sources that Wikipedia emphasizes on but also it’s the quality of sources. The source can’t be too new (not proven) and must be known facts (in more than one source) notwithstanding Wikipedia also preferred unbiased information. If a company makes a product it’s a conflict of interest for them to write a Wikipedia page for the product. Wikipedia is also open community. Meaning we are the hands and feet of Wikipedia. Thus Wikipedia has an army of youthful editors coding, spellchecking, improving and maintaining it. Thus it’s always up to date and relevant.

These reasons along with features like Sandbox, has been used to Fortify Wikipedia. It has made Wikipedia an unbiased, trustworthy and credible platform.