Fake professor at Wikipedia

[randomint]

linkage

"The editor, known as Essjay, had described himself as a professor of religion at a private university.

But he was in fact Ryan Jordan, 24, a college student from Kentucky who used texts such as Catholicism for Dummies to help him work."

bwahaha ha haa

 

[Amused]

Whoops!

 

[waggy]

and that is just one reason why it should not be used as a research citation.

 

[JoeFahey]

Originally posted by: waggy
and that is just one reason why it should not be used as a research citation.

What are the others?

 

[djheater]

Originally posted by: waggy
and that is just one reason why it should not be used as a research citation.

Do people actually argue that it can be?

I definately use it to give me an overview and to lead me to other sources, but I would never consider using it as a citation in anything serious.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: JoeFahey

Originally posted by: waggy
and that is just one reason why it should not be used as a research citation.

What are the others?

It's a tertiary source. You should really only use primary and secondary sources in a research paper. That's why they don't let you use encyclopedias for research papers past jr. high - encyclopedia articles essentially ARE research papers.

A guy at my high school actually printed out an article from a CD encyclopedia to turn in as a research paper. He didn't get away with it. The copyright notices were a dead giveaway.

Originally posted by: djheater

Do people actually argue that it can be?

I definately use it to give me an overview and to lead me to other sources, but I would never consider using it as a citation in anything serious.

Many lazy college students.

 

[ScottFern]

I actually used Wikipedia over the last 2 years in college. That was before when it was less well known and my professors never called me on it. Disadvantages of being old and not with the technology era! 😛

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: djheater

Originally posted by: waggy
and that is just one reason why it should not be used as a research citation.

Do people actually argue that it can be?

I definately use it to give me an overview and to lead me to other sources, but I would never consider using it as a citation in anything serious.

yes many do use it.

 

[Jeeebus]

Last year, my wife, a high school teacher, gave her students an essay assignment whereby they had to report on people who have contributed to math.

There was a lot of plagiarism all around, but one kid in particular stood out.

Turned in an essay that was copy/pasted directly from Wikipedia. And I mean blue hyperlinks and all for everything from names to dates. If you're going to cheat, at least put some effort into it.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Jeeebus
Last year, my wife, a high school teacher, gave her students an essay assignment whereby they had to report on people who have contributed to math.

There was a lot of plagiarism all around, but one kid in particular stood out.

Turned in an essay that was copy/pasted directly from Wikipedia. And I mean blue hyperlinks and all for everything from names to dates. If you're going to cheat, at least put some effort into it.

hahahah

 

[mugs]

I think it's only appropriate to link to the Wikipedia article about this scandal:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essjay_scandal

I'm curious about how this was found out. The BBC article and the Wikipedia article both say it was discovered with the New Yorker made a correction to their article. How did the New Yorker find out?

 

[Scarpozzi]

Maybe they should spell it "weakipedia"....

 

[fire400]

sad