User:Cj413/sandbox

Cameron Craig

21 September 2016

Evaluating a Wikipedia Article

Wikipedia is one of the greatest sources of information available to those with access to the internet; the ability for an expert from any field to add an entry to this global encyclopedia makes it convenient and it’s knowledge awesomely broad. However, this is broadly accessible authorship is a double edged sword. The reader must consider if the article they are reading is biased, factually correct, and has cited appropriate information. One such article to consider is the entry on meritocracy. Since it contains political and historical connotations, the page could easily have misleading facts and biases, so it is important to analyze the information presented on the page and sources cted. After evaluation, Meritocracy is a strongly supported and largely unbiased Wikipedia entry that is a trustable source of information.

An important portions of any academic paper is its citations; good citations prove the information presented is not based solely on the writer’s opinions and anecdotal experience, but rather upon experts and trustable published work. Meritocracy has 58 citations for 43 total paragraphs, citations which include many valid books, articles, and information pages (such as government sites) for the claims. Without  doubt, the information is heavily cited with on average every paragraph having 1-2 citations; the broad range of information sources also support that the claims presented in the article are from a variety of backgrounds and thus that the information doesn’t disregard any important information or opinions on the subject. For example, one of the most important facts from the article is the origin of the term “meritocracy,” a fact which aptly includes five citations after being stated. That information could have easily been found in one place; for example, the Oxford Reference page on the word “meritocracy” contains all the information found in the wikipedia section on the origin of the word (Wallace). However, the citations for the origin of “meritocracy” contains information directly from the book it originated from, as well as from articles and books on different subjects. This variety means that the author of this wikipedia entry took specific time to analyze different sources and create a bias-free and factual entry, rather just relying on one, possibly erroneous source. No source of information is infallible and not without some sort of bias from the author; nevertheless, Meritocracy is able to avoid these faults by using a broad variety of information, which is shown through its commitment to citing many different sources.

The talk page for wikipedia articles is a good way to judge the validity of an article. For Meritocracy, the comments in the past hold heavy criticism, however, the more recent comments shed light on how the article has been heavily updated, even down to minor errors.  It has been criticized, its errors fixed, and its information backed up without sources. The comments from the talk page emphasize that the article has not only been backed up well, but that its faults were recognized and corrected by the community.

The validity of an article is crucial and Wikipedia is infamous as being an unreliable source. However, by reviewing and evaluating a given entry, a reader can determine if the article is trustworthy or not. For the entry Meritocracy, it's heavy citations and proof of evaluation give it validity; after evaluation, it is easy to determine that the article is a valid and helpful source of information.

Works Cited

Wallace, Susan, ed. A Dictionary of Education (2 ed.). Oxford Reference, 2016

Wikipedia contributors, "Meritocracy," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meritocracy&oldid=740358260 (accessed September 22, 2016).