On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 9:59 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe I am in a different academic field that doesn't emphasise the train of sources, but I have never referenced the articles that I used to get the sources I use for quotes or ideas in my articles... Nothing personal against authors who have really good reference lists, it is just that I reference ideas directly without the chain of evidence I guess.
As a student (of mathematics), I've been subjected to the standard lectures about not plagiarising, and I don't remember anything about having to cite the sources of your sources. I wouldn't cite a Wikipedia article that was just used to get me started as wasn't the actual source of any facts included in my work.
Ditto.
Though I have in fact been allowed to cite Wikipedia by more than one college professor. I usually approach the ones who disallow it to find out their reasons and after dismantling their arguments with "pro-Wikipedia propaganda" all I can see is some inexplicable deep-seated hatred. Why I don't know.
More than one such professor have been rather old female librarians. Not to stereotype, but I honestly wonder if it's just your typical "kids-these-days" attitudes.
Oh, and the admin bit can be quite useful outside of Wikipedia. I know that on Wikipedia it's not a big deal (debatably) but the rest of the world considers those in a position of power to be some kind of official representative. One professor in particular argued with me for about five minutes in a class completely unrelated to Wikipedia that we required people to have an account to edit any article now and that Wikipedia wasn't what it used to be. A quick "you know I'm a Wikipedia admin, right, and I'd probably know if this happened?" silenced him for a few seconds after which he returned to his lecture without another word on the topic. Say what you will about treating adminship improperly, but it felt damn good.
Anywho...