WIKIPEDIA

Conceptaully, Wikipedia is the ideal web site. This is a site in which anyone can access any information they desire from the perspective of human beings without a corporate bias. While anything can be posted on this cite and appear true, it is a fact that the site may provide false information. But, as a whole I would call Wikipedia a pretty realiable source. Every time I have had to use the site, I have been provided with adequate information. I sometimes run across sentences or phrases that appear to be a bit opinionated, but these are not hard to spot. I use Wikipedia as a source to understand the basic knowledge of a particular subject or person. I do not rely on the specific details wikipedia provides. But if I am just wanting a quick understadning of what something is or who someone is, Wikipedia is great.
I would cite this website in a paper when referring to something that is simple and not to detailed, but I would not use it as a major source in a paper. This is simply because the margin for error is a bit higher with this site than a scholarly journal for example. This is not a bad thing for the site, just a cautionary action. Statments and articles in scholarly journals are 100% proved true, while wikipedia, as i said, is not. A teacher may be less willing to take information from Wikipedia seriously than if it were from a scholarly journal or magazine. When writing a paper i am concerned with making it entirely accurate. Wikipdeia though is a great tool for gaining instant knowledge on a particular subject.