Abstract
Wikipedia is by far the largest online encyclopedia, and the number of errors it contains is on par with the professional sources even in specialized topics such as biology or medicine. Yet, the academic world is still treating it with great skepticism because of the types of inaccuracies present there, the widespread plagiarism from Wikipedia, and historic biases, as well as jealousy regarding the loss of the knowledge dissemination monopoly. This article argues that it is high time not only to acknowledge Wikipedia's quality but also to start actively promoting its use and development in academia.
Highlights
BackgroundIn 2005, Nature published a study describing Wikipedia as going “head to head” with Britannica [1]
Some of the reasons for these reservations may be legitimate
Wikipedia is by far the largest online encyclopedia, and the number of errors it contains is on par with the professional sources even in specialized topics such as biology or medicine
Summary
In 2005, Nature published a study describing Wikipedia as going “head to head” with Britannica [1]. Standards of quality are shaped by peer-to-peer local language communities and vary widely among Wikipedia projects, and between articles within languages [2]. Wikipedia is still treated with suspicion by the professoriate and sneered at in academic circles [7]. This is especially disturbing, as academics are best positioned to shape Wikipedia [8], because of their expertise, as well as because of their access to students, who can improve Wikipedia for coursework under their supervision. It may be worthwhile to consider the reasons for scholars’ reluctance to openly use, recommend, and incorporate Wikipedia into coursework
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
