RE: Wikipedia and authority - Appellate cites

From: Marie Erickson (MErickson@LASC.ORG)
Date: Mon Aug 20 2007 - 10:34:38 PDT


I give an Internet assignment to my paralegal students, which reuqires them to research breed-specific legislation, distinguish reliable cites from others, and come up with a short paper about why it's bad to ban pit bulls. They're supposed to check ordinances on municode.com and find reliable websites about the dogs and organizations which prefer dangerous-dog ordinances to breed-specific ones. We have a general discussion of how to tell if a website is reliable. Last spring one of my students cited the pit bull entry on Wikipedia. The article wasn't bad, but some wit had substituted a picture of the breed with one of a Libertarian Party candidate for some council seat in California. A very severe woman in a suit. Not nice. But a good example of why Wikipedia is not reliable. Marie Erickson, MLS/JD Head of Public Services Law Library of Louisiana 400 Royal St., 2nd floor New Orleans, LA 70130-2104 504 310-2515 800 820-3038 (Louisiana only) merickson@lasc.org ________________________________ From: owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu [mailto:owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu] On Behalf Of Ryan, Robert S. Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 11:47 AM To: Scott Burgh; law lib; CALL Subject: RE: Wikipedia and authority - Appellate cites There are at least 2 published California appellate decisions and several unpublished which cite Wikipedia. Bob Ryan (I'm back. New Jersey to California. Rte. 80. America is lovely when seen from a 16 foot truck.) Hill Farrer & Burrill Los Angeles ________________________________ From: owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu [mailto:owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu] On Behalf Of Scott Burgh Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 8:52 AM To: law lib; CALL Subject: Wikipedia and authority Greetings: With the internet, I often raise the issue to the patrons of where does the authority of the information lie regarding issues such as credibility, currency, and reliability. While I love Wikipedia as a starting point, the article link here shows that a hacker's program has pinpointed origins of Wikipedia edits to indicate that alterations to the popular online encyclopedia have come from the CIA and the Vatican, as well as from politicians making their entries more flattering. Check out the story from the Sydney Morning Herald: http://www.smh.com.au/news/Technology/CIA-and-Vatican-edit-Wikipedia-entries/ 2007/08/18/1186857828993.html Thank you. Scott Burgh Chief Law Librarian City of Chicago Department of Law Library =================================== To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (a) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (b) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any matters addressed in this communication." =================================== The information contained in this electronic mail message is confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above, and may be privileged. The information herein may also be protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC Sections 2510-2521. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone (213-620-0460), and delete the original message. Thank you. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ This email and any files transmitted herewith are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. This disclaimer also confirms that this email message has been scanned for the presence of computer viruses. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifies and with authority, states them to be the views of the Supreme Court of Louisiana.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:47:00 PST