Do scientists and scholars use wikipedia?

Answer 1

yes - just for quick unimportant things though

like for example, to find the boiling point of ethylene glycol:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethylene_glycol

Answer 2

Science and Engineering Department at Marriott Library at the University of Utah has a web page at wiki
cuz students use wikipedia too much.

Answer 3

It is not good as a reputable source of information but what some people may not realize is the source of much of their information is cited on wikipedia pages and a lot of them are more reputable.

Answer 4

I use wikipedia mainly for recreational knowledge (such as if I want to read about animals or biographies of famous people). However, if I need information pertaining to my research, then I look for other reliable sources such as articles from the library online.

Answer 5

I use it for only basic information. I do not trust it for anything beyond what one could find from any other reference. This is simply because it is so easy to access from almost any location. However, since it is not regulated in any way as to who posts on it or insurance that the information is accurate, I reply on more trustworthy references for the more detailed information I might look for.

Answer 6

Wiki can be edited by any idiot with access to the internet. Would you trust it for anything of any importance? Articles in scientific journals, in contrast, are signed and have to run the gantlet of reviewers and editors. Biiiiiiiig difference.

Answer 7

I couldn't even use it for my AP chem research paper, so I'm assuming that scientists don't use it.

Answer 8

sure. but not for more than "quick and dirty" information. i am very fond of the "random article" button.