Difference between revisions of "Accuracy and Quality in Historical Representation: Wikipedia, Textbooks and the Investiture Controversy"
(infobox) |
(cat.) |
||
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
== Overview == | == Overview == | ||
Wikipedia’s popularity is unquestioned, but a perceived lack of accuracy and [[reliability]] in articles on historical topics prevents historians from embracing it more fully. This article argues that accuracy may be only one component of overall quality. While [[Wikipedia]] may have demonstrable shortcomings, it also has strengths in areas such as [[completeness]] and accessibility. These strengths appear when historical narratives in Wikipedia are compared to other sources of historical information readily available to American undergraduates. The article compares Wikipedia’s entry on the Investiture Controversy to current scholarship and textbook treatments of the theme. On a broader view of quality, Wikipedia appears in a more favorable light than it does when authors employ a narrow focus on accuracy about specific dates and events. | Wikipedia’s popularity is unquestioned, but a perceived lack of accuracy and [[reliability]] in articles on historical topics prevents historians from embracing it more fully. This article argues that accuracy may be only one component of overall quality. While [[Wikipedia]] may have demonstrable shortcomings, it also has strengths in areas such as [[completeness]] and accessibility. These strengths appear when historical narratives in Wikipedia are compared to other sources of historical information readily available to American undergraduates. The article compares Wikipedia’s entry on the Investiture Controversy to current scholarship and textbook treatments of the theme. On a broader view of quality, Wikipedia appears in a more favorable light than it does when authors employ a narrow focus on accuracy about specific dates and events. | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Embed == | ||
+ | === Wikipedia Quality === | ||
+ | <code> | ||
+ | <nowiki> | ||
+ | Halsted, David G.. (2013). "[[Accuracy and Quality in Historical Representation: Wikipedia, Textbooks and the Investiture Controversy]]". Open Library of Humanities. DOI: 10.16995/dm.50. | ||
+ | </nowiki> | ||
+ | </code> | ||
+ | |||
+ | === English Wikipedia === | ||
+ | <code> | ||
+ | <nowiki> | ||
+ | {{cite journal |last1=Halsted |first1=David G. |title=Accuracy and Quality in Historical Representation: Wikipedia, Textbooks and the Investiture Controversy |date=2013 |doi=10.16995/dm.50 |url=https://wikipediaquality.com/wiki/Accuracy_and_Quality_in_Historical_Representation:_Wikipedia,_Textbooks_and_the_Investiture_Controversy |journal=Open Library of Humanities}} | ||
+ | </nowiki> | ||
+ | </code> | ||
+ | |||
+ | === HTML === | ||
+ | <code> | ||
+ | <nowiki> | ||
+ | Halsted, David G.. (2013). &quot;<a href="https://wikipediaquality.com/wiki/Accuracy_and_Quality_in_Historical_Representation:_Wikipedia,_Textbooks_and_the_Investiture_Controversy">Accuracy and Quality in Historical Representation: Wikipedia, Textbooks and the Investiture Controversy</a>&quot;. Open Library of Humanities. DOI: 10.16995/dm.50. | ||
+ | </nowiki> | ||
+ | </code> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | [[Category:Scientific works]] |
Latest revision as of 08:21, 26 February 2021
Authors | David G. Halsted |
---|---|
Publication date | 2013 |
DOI | 10.16995/dm.50 |
Links | Original |
Accuracy and Quality in Historical Representation: Wikipedia, Textbooks and the Investiture Controversy - scientific work related to Wikipedia quality published in 2013, written by David G. Halsted.
Overview
Wikipedia’s popularity is unquestioned, but a perceived lack of accuracy and reliability in articles on historical topics prevents historians from embracing it more fully. This article argues that accuracy may be only one component of overall quality. While Wikipedia may have demonstrable shortcomings, it also has strengths in areas such as completeness and accessibility. These strengths appear when historical narratives in Wikipedia are compared to other sources of historical information readily available to American undergraduates. The article compares Wikipedia’s entry on the Investiture Controversy to current scholarship and textbook treatments of the theme. On a broader view of quality, Wikipedia appears in a more favorable light than it does when authors employ a narrow focus on accuracy about specific dates and events.
Embed
Wikipedia Quality
Halsted, David G.. (2013). "[[Accuracy and Quality in Historical Representation: Wikipedia, Textbooks and the Investiture Controversy]]". Open Library of Humanities. DOI: 10.16995/dm.50.
English Wikipedia
{{cite journal |last1=Halsted |first1=David G. |title=Accuracy and Quality in Historical Representation: Wikipedia, Textbooks and the Investiture Controversy |date=2013 |doi=10.16995/dm.50 |url=https://wikipediaquality.com/wiki/Accuracy_and_Quality_in_Historical_Representation:_Wikipedia,_Textbooks_and_the_Investiture_Controversy |journal=Open Library of Humanities}}
HTML
Halsted, David G.. (2013). "<a href="https://wikipediaquality.com/wiki/Accuracy_and_Quality_in_Historical_Representation:_Wikipedia,_Textbooks_and_the_Investiture_Controversy">Accuracy and Quality in Historical Representation: Wikipedia, Textbooks and the Investiture Controversy</a>". Open Library of Humanities. DOI: 10.16995/dm.50.