I like Wikipedia for quick reference on subjects I want to learn some basic info about for my own personal interest (like the day at work that I decided I wished I knew more about the Spanish Revolution). I could see how it could be a problem if you were using it as a reference for a school paper.

I'm also very concerned about the growing number of news organizations that are citing it. I've heard it cited on several local news reports and even once on CNN. Now that is just lazy...and dangerous...journalism.

i love wikipedia! it's kind of like ebay, you can find anything on wikipedia. two thumbs up.

I'm with Brian. It's great for basic info, like what is St. Crispin’s Day... but it really does scare me that our news is using it as a reference tool.
I am a Wikipedia lover, I will admit. It covers a large breadth without to much depth, which is generally what I am looking for. If I want more depth, I usually go to a more reputable source.
And just as a side note... I would NEVER allow a student to use Wikipedia for a research paper. (they have tried)

A teacher friend of mine said that she had intentionally altered Wikipedia entries that she knew her students would be using for a paper. While it's a good lesson for her students, I'm not sure that I think it is a good idea.

I frown upon that practice. poo poo.

Seriously, I would think wikipedia could be an ok starting point for a high school paper since alot of the articles do give endnotes which can lead to static, verifiable sources. But I wouldn't want a kid to cite wikipedia itself, not because it is wikipedia, but because I wouldn't want them to reference britanica or worldbook either.

Kind of like cliff's notes in lit.--you would never want a kid to rely on them, and teachers may make efforts to thwart kids who do, but ultimately, cliff's notes aren't that bad if the kid follows up on the ideas, reads the notes with a critical eye, and ultimately produces good original work that interacts with its claims.

But notice that I find fault with wikipedia for its genre, not its method of gathering and validating information. That doesn't scare me.

I'm not a wikipedia fan. Too much crap on there, and it is difficult for some people (not everybody, but enough) to differentiate what is crap and what is fact. Some people don't follow up on it. Seriously, what kind of a reference tool is a website where anyone can post anything they want to and have it declared as fact? That kind of thing is better referred to as a 'discussion forum.' Just my humble opinion.