Writing from Sources
When writing an academic paper it is difficult to use one’s own experiences as knowledgeable support, thus one must rely on resources from others. These sources are typically found in the written form, books, periodicals, journals, or even on the Web. If the source used is not valid the essay will not be credible. Consequently, it is imperative that each source is evaluated to determine its credibility (Spatt, 2011). This paper will induce that Wikipedia is not a credible source of information for academic writing as debated by Team A by presenting both sides of the debate, providing a complete account of the argument, citing support, and providing fair presentation through identifying the criteria used to evaluate credibility of sources.
Prior to outlining Team A’s debate, it is important to note the criteria of an academic source. An academic source as stated in Writing from Sources 8th ed. (2011) must possess the following: credentials of the author, which includes specialization in the field or topic; impartiality, which includes keeping bias within reasonable limits; proper style and tone, which includes open-minded and purposeful approach; and currency, which includes relevance and up-to-date information. In addition, “academic sources are intended for a limited audience in the field. For example, an academic book is usually published by a university press and contains a level of scholarship and depth of analysis” (Spatt, 2011, p. 343). When it comes to the Web it is imperative to evaluate the source to meet these same academic criteria. One must inspect each site to make sure it is reliable before considering it as a reference.
Learning Team A’s debate involved arguments for both why Wikipedia is a viable source for academic writing and why it is not. The arguments for using Wikipedia as a source cited Wikipedia.org stating it is a good starting place for research projects as it provides the basics of information on a topic,...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document