On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 18:15:57 -0700, Paul C Bernhardt wrote: >It is my opinion that Wikipedia should be allowed as a citation by students >for >any paper that you would allow the citation of the Encyclopedia Britannica or >other top flight encyclopedia. Since most of us don't allow that, then it is a >moot point. I'm surprised to see the citation in the peer reviewed article >that >is not specifically about Wikipedia.
I'm in basic agreement with this point. >The reason I have that opinion is the studies that have shown Encyclopedia >Britannica and Wikipedia have a similar number of errors in scientific >articles. If they are comparable in error, aren't they comparably trustworthy? In addition, it is not always clear when a statement is to be considered a fact or an interpretation or an opnion. >But, students have to cite it correctly, which means getting the stable link >to >the version of the page they used. Each Wikipedia page has at the left margin >a >link for a toolbox entry called 'cite this page.' That takes you to a link >that >has a reasonably correctly formatted entry for APA and other styles for the >version of the page you were using. For instance, this is the citation for the >current version of the page for "Probability Density Function." > >Probability density function. (2010, May 15). In Wikipedia, The Free >Encyclopedia. Retrieved 01:05, June 9, 2010, from > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Probability_density_function&oldid=362226506 > Well, Bentler & Satorra only provide the link to the entry (not in the format you provide) after the quote within footnote #4. They do not provide an entry for it in their reference list on pages 120-121. -Mike Palij New York University [email protected] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=2982 or send a blank email to leave-2982-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
