[Air-L] using wikipedia articles in academic paper

[Nick Lalone]

How many times has this argument found itself on the internet now? Someone
should keep track.

I've been debating this topic with a friend of mine for quite some time. I
believe that (and this is for Sociology) Wikipedia is a nice place to start
to look at current definitions of groups and trends. We often start with
previous scholarly research on the group we're interested in looking at and
typically ignore what the group itself might have to say about themselves.
We rarely look first to news clippings, forums, or wikipedia to see what
other people are saying about particular groups; or about themselves. I've
felt for a long time that this should be where Sociology starts when
studying a group of people. I am often criticized for not looking to
authority for previous work first; however, my point of contention is that
who is a better authority on a group, previous work that is usually years
old or current topics on wikipedia about that group that has already lived
through the previous work's unintended after effects?

I suppose this is tangent to the current conversation but I felt it was
worth saying.

-- 
Nick LaLone