13 James P. Purdy’s “Wikipedia Is Good for You!?”
Writing Spaces Volume 1
Doing research and creating writing from that research can be a complex, daunting process, especially when some of the most readily available resources like Wikipedia are often banned from academic writing assignments. However, in this chapter James P. Purdy outlines what we can learn as researchers and writers from Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not only a useful tool at the beginning of a research project, it can also model some of the key concepts and stages in the research writing process.
“Because of their open participation, unreliability, and (potentially) shallow topic coverage, you generally should not cite Wikipedia as authoritative sources in college-level writing. This does not mean Wikipedia is not useful, or that you cannot read it, or that you should not cite it if you do use it. It does mean that Wikipedia is better used in other ways.”
MLA Citation Examples
Works Cited
Purdy, James P. “Wikipedia is Good for You!?” Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing Volume 1, edited by Charles Lowe and Pavel Zemlianksky, Parlor Press, 2010, pp. 205-224.
In-text citation
“Because of their open participation, unreliability, and (potentially) shallow topic coverage, you generally should not cite Wikipedia articles as authoritative sources in college-level writing. This does not mean that Wikipedia is not useful, or that you cannot read it, or that you should not cite it if you do use it. It does mean that Wikipedia is better used in other ways” (Purdy 209).
APA Citation Examples
References
Purdy, J.P. (2010). Wikipedia is good for you!? In Charles Lowe and Pavel Zemliansky (Eds.), Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, vol. 1 (pp. 205-224). New York: Parlor Press.
In-text citation
“Because of their open participation, unreliability, and (potentially) shallow topic coverage, you generally should not cite Wikipedia articles as authoritative sources in college-level writing. This does not mean that Wikipedia is not useful, or that you cannot read it, or that you should not cite it if you do use it. It does mean that Wikipedia is better used in other ways” (p. 209).
Chicago Citation Examples
Bibliography
Purdy, James. “Wikipedia is Good for You!?.” in Writing Spaces: Reading on Writing Volume 1, ed. Charles Lowe and Pavel Zemliansky (New York: Parlor Press, 2010), 205-224.
In-text citation
“Because of their open participation, unreliability, and (potentially) shallow topic coverage, you generally should not cite Wikipedia articles as authoritative sources in college-level writing. This does not mean that Wikipedia is not useful, or that you cannot read it, or that you should not cite it if you do use it. It does mean that Wikipedia is better used in other ways” (Purdy, 2010, 209).
About the author
name: Writing Spaces Volume 1
institution: Parlor Press and WAC Clearinghouse
Released in 2010, the first issue of Writing Spaces was edited by Drs. Charles Lowe and Pavel Zemliansky. In addition to the Writing Spaces Website, volume 1 can be accessed through WAC Clearinghouse, as well as Parlor Press.
From Parlor Press
Topics in Volume 1 of the series include academic writing, how to interpret writing assignments, motives for writing, rhetorical analysis, revision, invention, writing centers, argumentation, narrative, reflective writing, Wikipedia, patchwriting, collaboration, and genres.
From WAC Clearinghouse
Charles Lowe is Assistant Professor of Writing at Grand Valley State University where he teachers composition, professional writing, and Web design. Pavel Zemliansky is Associate Professor in the School of Writing, Rhetoric, and Technical Communication at James Madison University.
Publication Information: Lowe, Charles, & Pavel Zemliansky (Eds.). (2010). Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, Volume 1. WrtingSpaces.org; Parlor Press; The WAC Clearinghouse. https://wac.colostate.edu/books/writingspaces/writingspaces1/
Publication Date: June 14, 2010
