Review Wikipedia

I have used Wikipedia for a long time. I think it has replaced the major published encyclopedias for accessibility. I have noticed that whenever I look for a definition as part of a Google search, the wikipedia entry is always listed first.

For this assignment, I searched for articles on deflation, elementary algebra, and attention deficit disorder. The articles on deflation and attention deficit disorder were excellent. They were clearly written. They contained a competent survey of the topic. They also contained links to related topics as well as links to more in-depth information. The wikipedia math articles were really not as good as the economics and education entries. The math articles were little more than lists of formulas and worked examples. When you look up math information you usually want to be 'taught'. You want to learn how to do something. The purpose of Wikipedia is not to 'teach'. It is really just description. For math topics, this really doesn't work well.


Questions--
What Wikipedia topic did you visit?
I read entries on deflation, elementary algebra, and attention deficit disorder

Was it creditable and accurate?
Yes, the articles were accurate. The fact that they are written by members of the public does not bother me. Over time, they will self-correct and probably be better than entries written by professionals. I don't expect Wikipedia to provide research or in-depth analysis. It provides description and definitions only. It gives you a good overview of the topic, nothing more. It is good at what it does.

Would you use Wikipedia as a resource professionally in the future?
Yes, I will use Wikipedia in the future. You can always rely on it for a good, concise overview of any topic. Whether you are interested in broad topics or very vague topics, they are all there.