Warning: mysql_get_server_info(): No such file or directory in /home/jbj/jbj.wordherders.net/wp-content/plugins/simple-tagging-plugin/simpletagging.php on line 299

Warning: mysql_get_server_info(): A link to the server could not be established in /home/jbj/jbj.wordherders.net/wp-content/plugins/simple-tagging-plugin/simpletagging.php on line 299

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/jbj/jbj.wordherders.net/wp-content/plugins/simple-tagging-plugin/simpletagging.php:299) in /home/jbj/jbj.wordherders.net/wp-includes/feed-rss2-comments.php on line 8
Comments on: Apparently Wikipedia’s still controversial http://www.jbj.wordherders.net/2008/08/20/apparently-wikipedias-still-controversial/ "A man needn't go far to find a subject, if he's ready with his salt-box."--Uncle Pumblechook Wed, 14 May 2014 19:32:14 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.1 By: Dance http://www.jbj.wordherders.net/2008/08/20/apparently-wikipedias-still-controversial/comment-page-1/#comment-13125 Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:10:10 +0000 http://www.jbj.wordherders.net/2008/08/20/apparently-wikipedias-still-controversial/#comment-13125 Actually, I just realized that my answer to “do I cite this background?” is “your paper probably doesn’t really need all that background. Filler!”

By: jbj http://www.jbj.wordherders.net/2008/08/20/apparently-wikipedias-still-controversial/comment-page-1/#comment-13124 Thu, 21 Aug 2008 15:46:38 +0000 http://www.jbj.wordherders.net/2008/08/20/apparently-wikipedias-still-controversial/#comment-13124 As long as “not citing encyclopedias” is a general principle, which I can understand, then not citing Wikipedia seems reasonable to me.

And you’re right: the links and references are often overrated.

By: Dance http://www.jbj.wordherders.net/2008/08/20/apparently-wikipedias-still-controversial/comment-page-1/#comment-13123 Thu, 21 Aug 2008 15:23:44 +0000 http://www.jbj.wordherders.net/2008/08/20/apparently-wikipedias-still-controversial/#comment-13123 I didn’t know about #2. Thanks. Especially since I’m a little contrary—I do tell my students to cite background information on the better safe than sorry principle, and because they don’t always know what is background, and what is background to their topic is not the same as common knowledge—but I also say don’t cite Wikipedia because you shouldn’t cite encyclopedias anyhow. Guess I should fix that.

Re the 4 ways, I specifically advocate reading Wikipedia for Context and Keywords and narrowing down thesis/question ideas, but am frequently unhappy with the Links and References they offer, so I mention that with a caution.

By: Rizzo http://www.jbj.wordherders.net/2008/08/20/apparently-wikipedias-still-controversial/comment-page-1/#comment-13121 Thu, 21 Aug 2008 14:47:36 +0000 http://www.jbj.wordherders.net/2008/08/20/apparently-wikipedias-still-controversial/#comment-13121 The antagonism towards Wikipedia is hilarious to me. Sure, there are inaccuracies, but how much worse is it than the textbooks that students use? Various fact-check projects have shown textbooks to contain tons of errors.

Speaking of t-shirts, would you at all mind if I send you an invitation and a 20%-off coupon code when my t-shirt site is up? (which should be in October). Busted has great shirts, and I think you’ll like some of my stuff too.

Just let me know, thanks!