These articles bring up several valid points about knowledge and credibility. Knowledge is only as good as it's source. False "knowledge" was placed on Wikipedia about John Seigenthaler. This information was presented as fact and deeply hurt Mr.Seigenthaler. It made false accusations that stated he was involved in the Kennedy assassination. The person that posted this falsity remains anonymous which is a major concern as to the credibility of Wikipedia.

Since Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, many credibility issues are raised. No source on Wikipedia should be completely trusted or cited. When using this as a source of information, you should check other trusted sources to ensure credibility. You can never be too safe when it comes to research.

The article, "A False Wikipedia 'Biography,' is a great example of the old adage, "don't believe everything you read." Seigenthaler's false biography just goes to show how imperfect this online resourse is. I feel that the founder of Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales, is being irresponsible by not tracking or documenting who contributed to the site. Until incidences like this are prevented, I will continue to be hestitant to use Wikipedia, academically or otherwise.

The second article, "Why the Media Can't Get Wikipedia Right," discusses that Wikipedia tracks only the IP addresses of unregistered users. Pseudonyms are used for contributers who are registered, but are not actively monitored. This adds to my concern. I want to know where my information is coming from. A false identity tells me nothing and it does not do well for the writer's integrity. If what you are writing is truthfull, then why hide? Wikipedia needs to do a better job at knowing who is adding content or making changes.

These issues about false facts are things found in any source of information. We have to keep in mind that there is a degree of human error in any written information. I think that it is common sense to know that any open information transaction could have possible false facts or assumptions. However, this is a much much broader resource for research easily done online. I would recommend double checking and cross referencing with another source as well.

I feel that Steigenthaler is overreacting to these statements. I'm sure that at some point in time, working in government and politics, he has been slandered before. I can see being upset about a falsification on facts, but to say that Wikipedia is "unreliable" is absurd. This is a great resource to quickly look for facts, but like
I said before, you should cross reference with other resources as well. Overall, when it comes to using Wikipedia for research, use it but don't abuse it.

Since Wikipedia is open to change by anyone it was not hard to figure out that some of the facts may not be facts at all. Some people may just use the site for slander as in the case of Seigenthaler. But this should not take away from the information that is true on the site. The internet is full of false information and should not be the only use for information. These articles just made me think that I should cross reference information that I find on Wikipedia.

In the case of Seigenthaler made me think about how people can use the internet for useless reasons. There is false information all over the internet, you just have to take the good with the bad. Since Mr. Seignethaler is in politics I can see why he got upset when negative false information got printed about him. But since wikipedia can be changed by anyone all he really had to do was change the information on the site to the facts.

The first article is just another example, which shows that the Internet is still not a credible source of information. I do believe that sometimes, information from the Internet can be helpful. However, I think that everybody should keep in mind that information on the Internet will usually contain many errors, and you should always cross-reference and never rely on it entirely.

As long as anonymity exists on the Internet (Wikipedia), incidents like “Seigenthaler’s false biography” will constantly occur. Since there is no solution to this problem currently, we will just have to use common sense, and try not to trust everything we read. I agree with Jimmy Wales on the fact that nobody should cite articles from Wikipedia. If I were conducting formal research, I would always look for published sources.