After learning about encyclopedias in class and doing a little research of my own, I realized there are both pros and cons when it comes to using encyclopedias and Internet sources like Wikipedia. To start off, encyclopedias are very reliable. They have been edited, revised, and edited again. The information is as current as the encyclopedia's publishing date. The information also comes from people who are very educated and knowledgeable on the subject. They know their stuff! However, there are some cons when it come to encyclopedias. Encyclopedias can be very biased. Only information that the publisher and editor want to see are present in the books themselves. As Professor Wexelbaum showed, a whole section or population of information could be missing based off of the companies preference.
Wikipedia is a search engine that I still have mixed feelings about. My high school teachers drilled into my head that Wikipedia is not a reliable source and never to use it when writing papers. I can see positives and negatives on both sides of it. As for the pros, there seems be information on any topic on everything imaginable. Wikipedia has it all! However, the problem with Wikipedia is that anyone could write information about the subject no matter their creditability on it. I can remember my teacher bringing up multiple searches that had misinformation on the subject.
I am actually having problems location print encyclopedias and E-encyclopedias on my subject. I'm not sure if I am looking in the right spot, or using the wrong words, or if there are none available on my topic, but I plan on asking Professor Wexelbaum for help next class period.
Finally, I would have to say that using Wikipedia is more appropriate in my research presentation at this time because I have yet to locate an encyclopedia. Wikipedia had a lot of information on my subject that I thought was very useful. I was definitely able to find information that I can put into my research presentation project.
Hi Morgan,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your post on encyclopedia/Wikipedia entries.
As you pointed out in the cons of traditional encyclopedias, they are not necessarily more reliable than Wikipedia, are they?
What is one thing that could make a Wikipedia entry very reliable?
Re: your search for print and E-encyclopedias on your topic:
Cocaine is a type of drug, yes? Have you tried doing an advanced search for "drug" and "encyclopedia", or "substance abuse" and "encyclopedia"?
I look forward to your response...
Sincerely,
Professor Wexelbaum
It is true that one would think encyclopedias are more reliable than Wikipedia but that doesn't always seem to be the case. One thing that makes Wikipedia very reliable is the fact that you can see what professional articles have used it as a source. As you demonstrated in class, some Wikipedia articles have been cited as a source for very renowned magazines.
ReplyDeleteI have not used those combinations yet in the advance search. I plan on trying them and hopefully receive better results! Thanks!
Thanks Morgan. Please let me know how the new searches turn out, in regard to finding encyclopedia entries on your topic.
ReplyDeleteI was able to find an encyclopedia with your tips for a search string. The one I found is called, Cocaine, a new epidemic and is from the series of Encyclopedia of Psychoactive Drugs.
Delete