7 Comments

Find It Friday: Are ‘Wiki’ Sites Reliable Research Tools?

Image representing Wikipedia as depicted in Cr...
Image via CrunchBase

For this week’s ‘Find It Friday’ installment, I pose the following question – Are wiki sites now reliable enough to be used as research tools by lawyers?

For those of you unfamiliar with the technical aspects of what a ‘wiki’ is, the gist of ‘wiki’ sites is that they are designed to allow quick and easy creation and editing of content by users acting collaboratively as opposed to a traditional website that may have its content altered only by a single person (e.g., “the webmaster”) or a select group of people.

Unfortunately, this ‘ease of creation and editing’ feature essential to ‘wiki’ sites created some content problems.  Many  argue that the information on ‘wiki’ sites is unreliable because it is simply too easy for someone with little to no actual knowledge in a particular area to modify an article, thereby creating incorrect information.  Such misuse is particularly troubling in a subject such as law where specialized training is required.

Without a doubt, the most well-known ‘wiki’ site is Wikipedia, of which I assume most of you are aware.  In late 2005, to address concerns about reliability, Wikipedia tightened controls over its content, at least for certain types of articles.  In my opinion, this additional content control dramatically improved Wikipedia as a potential research tool for lawyers.

Over the years, courts have – with increasing frequency cited Wikipedia – as authority for some aspect of the case at hand.  In preparation for writing this article, I logged onto Westlaw and did a quick search for the word “Wikipedia” in the ‘all federal cases’ directory (ALLFEDS).  This quick search returned 281 results.  The federal courts, it would seem, are becoming more comfortable with ‘wikis’, at least with Wikipedia.

Many of you may have already incorporated Wikipedia in some way as an additional research tool in your practice.  However, some lawyers may not be aware that there are actually many online resources, other than Wikipedia, that offer information on a ‘wiki’ platform.  You can link to an article discussing various ‘wiki’ sites here and here.

Among the more well-known of these are sites such as WikiAnswers.com.  I chose WikiAnswers as an example because it happens to be a ‘wiki’ site with articles specific to law, entitled “law and legal issues.”  For this post, I asked WikiAnswers.com, “What is collateral estoppel?”  You can link to the answers it gave me here, which I thought were reasonably good.  And, it was faster than looking it up in Black’s Law Dictionary, even though Black’s Law Dictionary is still likely to be viewed as more authoritative.

Bottom line – as more and more courts start relying on ‘wiki’ sites in case citations, their credibility will continue to grow.  So, you may want to give some thought to utilizing these sites.  Nevertheless, I welcome your feedback about ‘wiki’ sites…what do you think about their reliability?  Have you encountered articles on any ‘wiki’ sites discussing legal topics that were simply incorrect?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Advertisements

7 comments on “Find It Friday: Are ‘Wiki’ Sites Reliable Research Tools?

  1. This post is genuinely a nice one it assists new net viewers, who are wishing for blogging.

    Like

  2. Greetings, I believe your site might be having internet browser compatibility problems.
    Whenever I look at your site in Safari, it looks fine however,
    if opening in I.E., it’s got some overlapping issues. I just wanted to provide you with a quick heads up! Besides that, great website!

    Like

  3. I’m curious to find out what blog system you happen to be working with? I’m having
    some minor security problems with my latest site and I’d like to find something more secure. Do you have any recommendations?

    Like

  4. You actually make it seem really easy with your presentation however
    I find this matter to be really something which I believe I’d never understand. It seems too complex and extremely vast for me. I am having a look ahead on your subsequent post, I will attempt to get the cling of it!

    Like

  5. Great post. Quick point — the question you asked on WikiAnswers actually took you to the answer from Westlaw, which Answers.com licenses, on the non-wiki portion of the site. Answers.com (where I work) supplements its wiki with licensed sources from respected publishers like Oxford and Thomson Gale.

    Like

  6. […] becoming more comfortable with ‘wikis’, at least with Wikipedia.cyberesq.wordpress.com, Cyber-Esq., Jan […]

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: