Wikipedia Mid-Term Follow-Up

In my opinion, Wikipedia should definitely not be used as a scholarly source for researchers and readers. The biased and controversial information we found on just one article is enough to prove that Wikipedia is not the best website for valid information. It does have some positive attributes though. It is a great start for researching information and can give the reader a general idea about what they are trying to find out. It has substantial information that can be used as a guide to research, but not entirely. I believe that because it is edited so often and by so many different people, it is impossible to have valid and reliable sources and information within the content. This is where its weakness lies. The sources (whichever ones are not a dead link) are not particularly accurate and informative as primary sources. Most of them are articles in magazines, personal blogs and so forth.
These strengths and weaknesses ultimately prove that technology is advancing and becoming a primary candidate for information sharing and editing. It has become to popular to share information and let the world know something as soon and as fast as possible. This is what Wikipedia does. It shares information through the internet in a timely manner to millions of users worldwide. Then if someone has something they want to add or delete, they are free to do so. Technology in this way is awesome because it allows for us to access information about anything within seconds. On the other hand, it has created a controversial website that cannot be depended upon for accurate information. Technology in this sense has effected the culture of our world in such a way that now anyone is a researcher and expert on information. It thwarts the talents of true researchers, but gives the average person a chance to shine.
After completing this project, I learned how controversial Wikipedia really can be. At first, I had no idea that there was so much useless information on the website. I used it all the time. Now, I will definitely think twice about citing Wikipedia as a source for any of my research papers. It has opened my eyes to the world of information editing and clearly demonstrates the power of revision.