Numerous studies have rated wikipedia's accuracy on the whole, the web encyclopedia is fairly reliable, but life's little mysteries own small investigation produced mixed results. Validity is the extent to which the construct measures what it says it is measuring the use of a blood pressure cuff is considered to be valid because it is measuring blood pressure, not something else. For every reputable website, there are dozens chock full of information that's inaccurate, unreliable or just plain nutty for the unwary, inexperienced journalist or researcher, such sites can present a minefield of possible problems with that in mind, here are eight ways to tell if a website is reliable. Wikipedia: wikipedia is an online open-source encyclopedia, which means that it can be edited by anyone while the information on the site is audited by a wikipedia editor, the information found there may or may not be correct or current. Wikipedia- is it a credible and valid source of information wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia it contains millions of articles and depends mainly on volunteers and contributors to ensure that information are up to date.
This measure is reliable, but no valid (that is, it's consistent but wrong) the second, shows hits that are randomly spread across the target you seldom hit the center of the target but, on average, you are getting the right answer for the group (but not very well for individuals. Reliability and validity are, conceptually, quite distinct and there need not be any necessary relationship between the two be wary of statements which imply that a valid test or measure has to be reliable. Wikipedia bans daily mail as 'unreliable' source online encyclopaedia editors rule out publisher as a reference citing ‘reputation for poor fact checking and sensationalism’ jasper jackson. No, this does not involve tracking authors down and grilling them on their credentials you are not liam neeson, and this is not taken 3 you're sleuthing methods will need to be a bit more covert.
Wikipedia as a credible and valid source of information muideen ayorinde mgt/521 april 6, 2012 jim bingel wikipedia created in 2001 tagged the free encyclopedia is a multilingual web-based,. Wikipedia: is it a credible and valid source many students use wikipedia as a source for valid information when researching for a paper or other assignments “wikipedia is a multilingual, web-based, free-content encyclopedia project based on an openly editable modelwikipedia's articles provide links to guide the user to related pages with. Source credibility – evaluating the reliability of a source not every source is suitable for use in a formal research paper, and the ultimate guide of what is. The creators of wikipedia are the first to admit that not every entry is accurate and that it might not be the best source of material for research papers here are some points to consider: look for a slant some articles are fair and balanced, but others look more like the leaning tower of pisa.
Validity and reliability of a test in addition to adequate norms, a test that wishes to be useful and accurate must also be reliable and valid. Is wikipedia a valid and credible source to try to defend wikipedia as a credible and valid source of information is usually assumed a non starter in academic circles, the antipathy towards the usefulness or usability of any information from wikipedia is palpable. Not credible as a source for valid information google can never be listed in your works cited or bibliography google is just a search engine that is programed to search one of the worlds largest. Wikipedia is increasingly used by people in the academic community, from first-year students to professors, as the easiest source of information about anything and everything.
For a test to be reliable, it also needs to be valid for example, if your scale is off by 5 lbs, it reads your weight every day with an excess of 5lbs the scale is reliable because it consistently reports the same weight every day, but it is not valid because it adds 5lbs to your true weight. It's the go-to website for information on just about anything but is the info on wikipedia worth it's weight in megabytes trace has the answer and tells us about a new plan to up the accuracy of. The way wikipedia judges sources and users editing it is that a hundred people gradually calcifying an article over a decade is somehow more reliable than someone like me, knowing what i know, going in and trying to redo it all to modern factual standards, and if you try to be revolutionary, you will not win the arbitration process. Over the last couple of weeks, wikipedia, the free, open-access encyclopedia, has taken a great deal of flak in the press for problems related to the credibility of its authors and its general.
Is wikileaks reliable wikileaks is reliable in my opinion i think wikileaks is reliable they put information on the internet that is pretty powerful read on as to why people might think they are more trustworthy than many governments when people are aware of the truth they are empowered to change, this is a mission of wiki leaks, to. Noun (wikipedia validity) the state of being valid, authentic or genuine having legal force a quality of a measurement indicating the degree to which the measure reflects the underlying construct, that is, whether it measures what it purports to measure (see reliability. The question that always arises when it comes to homework and research is whether it’s ok to use wikipedia as a source of information wikipedia is a fantastic site with a lot of great information, and this site is a possible exception to the rule your teacher can tell you for certain if you can use this source. Team a debated on whether wikipedia is a credible and valid source of information the team was divided into two groups, one side for and one side against among the five team members only one (the author) sided for wikipedia as a credible and valid source the debate lasted for seven days great.
Why isn't wikipedia a reputable source in the past few months we have talked about the importance of finding reputable sources for academic papers and why students shouldn't just google it we also touched on why wikipedia is not a reputable source to cite in an academic paper in writing tip #21: i can't use wikipedia. The greatest strength of wikipedia is that its contributors can chose which area they want to write about, which, in theory, means they only produce content where they are most qualified to do so. Wikipedia editors have said they will no please enter an email address please enter a valid email address please enter a valid especially when other more reliable.