Do you think Wikipedia is a good reliable source for either going to or sharing information about a Martial Art?
depends on the article. generally i find the ma articles in particular leave a bit to be desired, though.
Wikipedia is very good for popular subjects and academic pursuits. It gets gradually worse the more and more niche you want to go, especially where there is controversy or disagreement between experts. As Martial Arts are a niche area where two instructors rarely agree on anything, the articles leave a lot to be desired. The history of some of the arts is very complete (Judo, for example), but in terms of actually learning about the art, I'd say you can definitely do better elsewhere.
I'd say Wikipedia is a good starting point if you don't know anything about a topic, but you should use other sources for more detailed information.
I am going to respectfully disagree with the bolded part Aegis. I work in a Library. We are not allowed to use Wikipedia as a reference source for academic or reference questions due to it's unreliability. It is good for pop culture type questions. (Example: What book was that movie based on?) Or can be used as a jumping off point if it cites references that are reliable. Because then you can check those references. But on it's own, no it should not be used for academic pursuits. :hat:
As I recall, Wikipedia was shown to be more accurate than the Encyclopaedia Britannica for sciences while I was still at university (i.e. 10 years ago). The reason you can't use it as an academic reference isn't due to its reliability, which is excellent for most subjects, but because in theory the wording can be changed at any moment by anyone. As such, any quote can become invalid, any figure could be incorrect or vandalised. It's very rare that you actually encounter genuine issues with the content, and you could say that Wikipedia is an excellent starting point for informally learning about the basics of an academic subject, especially if you then follow the references section at the bottom of each page to find out where the figures and facts all came from.
Wikipedia pages themselves? Not entirely. The sources they usually cite on the other hand, a bit more so. There's a reason Wikipedia was banned as a citation source on previous courses and studies I've done (anyone can edit it basically).
Sure. It gives a decent overview of most subjects. I would generally not have a problem answering a question like "what is karate?" by sending someone to Wikipedia.
it's only a starting point. what i find the most useful are the links to the references. other than that, it's really only for basic information.
