povertyy

As students, we have probably all used wikipedia to get some sort of information for a project or presentation. However, if we take the “is-it-reliable?” power point, it is not reliable at all. First off, it does not have a published author. Anybody can post anything on wikipedia. However, I do not think that teacher know the truth about wikipedia. If the posting is not true, wikipedia deletes the posting within 24 hours. Enough said about wikipedia, I decided to look up poverty on wikipedia. If I search “poverty” on wikipedia, I can probably get enough information to do a couple hours speech on poverty. However, teachers wouldn’t accept it because the reason noted above. It isn’t reliable because anybody can post information. Moreover, the uploaded information is from other sites, which are cited at the bottom. I personally do not think that teachers know about this. Therefore, teachers see wikipeda as an unreliable source. Furthermore, because the author is anonymous, it is hard to tell if it is biased because the author is anonymous and we, as readers, do not know anything about the author and, or his/her background. It I easy for the author to post information only based on his opinion.

On wikipedia, if the searched topic is famous, such as poverty, there is more than enough information. For my case, there is a table of contents that split the information on poverty into 11 sections. By splitting the information into 11 sections, people can get the information they want rapidly. Therefore, I personally think that the way wikipedia gets its information across is convenient. Not only convenient, but also quality information. Because wikipedia also provided graphics, such as graph, maps, pictures, it can further connect to the reader. As noted above, all the information that wikipedia uses is cited. Therefore, if we can not trust wikipedia, we can go to that cited site and check out that site. However, the information would probably be the same.