As a student, I am well-familiar with the use of Wikipedia as a source for research. It is a convenient website that encompass a large range of topics. While it is a reliable tool for research, the fact remains that since the content in Wikipedia can be freely altered by anyone at any moment, there is an underlined risk that the information can be distorted and inaccurate. As such, from an academic point of view, professors shouldn’t accept Wikipedia as a reference. However, as I mentionned previously, while Wikipedia shouldn’t be used as a reference, it is still a great source of information despite its glaring flaw of being freely modifiable. Most of the time, the content on the website is correct, since it is regularly updated. There are very few instances where you can catch false information. From a pratical point of view, an individual should he able to trust the information found on this website. Moreover, the content on Wikipedia often comes with its own set of references, that a student can use to fact-check or to use as references for an assignment. From my own experience of using Wikipedia, the principle that “everybody want to do good” when sharing knowledge, according to Sue Gardner is accurate, since I very seldom catch vandals who delibirately spread false information on the website. In conclusion, I believe that since Wikipedia don’t have any hardline system to reinforce the accuracy of its content, it should’nt have any place in an academic paper. Nevertheless, much like capitalism, Wikipedians was able maintain the integrity of Wikpedia contents without the need for heavy regulations or surveillances. Students can still trust Wikipedia to increase their knowledge, so long as they don’t cite Wikipedia in their assignments.