A recent article in Wired revisited how attitudes toward Wikipedia come face to face with the reality of Wikipedia. It is the world's eighth most visited site, it is free, it is not monetized. Students still recite that you cannot get information from Wikipedia- that it is not a reliable site.
In short, there is a gap between what we say "Wikipedia is unreliable, and the information on it cannot be trusted" and the reality that we all use Wikipedia and often for all the right reasons.
One of the common critiques about Wikipedia is that consensus might not be the best method to determine what is "true." That is a compelling argument and not without merit. It is, however, precisely what researchers do. Send papers to scrutiny "peer review" and research results become "true" when most of the research community thinks they converge, and we reach consensus until new information disrupts it.In fact, a whole section of the Conceptual map about the Nature of Science (bottom right in the figure). Has to do with the community.
I will not repeat all the support and critiques of Wikipedia - you can read those on Wired in the original. I would like to instead suggest an addendum to how we treat Wikipedia when we teach students about Information Technology.
Let's make it Wikipedia first, never Wikipedia only. We always need to corroborate any information, but Wikipedia, with its basic information and the next set of links, can launch a search that is not guided just by the commercial and parochial interests of the monetized search engines only.
Wikipedia first
