Wikipedia

a. What is Wikipedia?  

It is a multilingual online encyclopedia operated by a nonprofit organization.  It's operated by the Wikimedia Foundation.
b. How would you answer the question posed in this piece “How reliable can a source be when anyone can edit it?

According to Jimmy Wales, only 18% of the people who edit Wikipedia are anonymous/off the street.  So, barely 1 in 5 non-Wikimedia Foundation members contribute to Wikipedia.  Whenever a huge majority of the people editing this are those who work for it, my mind is put at ease.  There are also other security tools, flags, and a lot of outside people that/who help to weed out incorrect editing.  So, for basic information I think that Wikipedia is pretty reliable.
c. Who do the creators of Wikipedia place their trust in when it comes to weeding out misinformation? 

 Ordinary people
d. Why did founder Larry Sanger leave Wikipedia? 

He didn't like the direction it was going in and he is critical of it's accuracy.
e. What would abuse or vandalism look like on a Wikipedia page? 

It would be changing the content of the article.
f. What do the statistics quoted in the third paragraph of this piece reveal? 

Many, many Wikipedia articles are out there.  About 8 million in 2007.  Can't image how many 5 years later.
g. Why do you think Wikipedia is so successful? 

I use it all of the time.  If you want to know more about something, it's incredibly easy to search for it.  Wikipedia shows up as one of the first choices in most search engines.
h. Why might Wikipedia’s creators not want to accept advertising? 

It would take away from the simple feel and it may turn Wikipedia into something it's leaders do not want.  Something commercial maybe.
i. How does Wikiscanner help increase the reliability of Wikipedia entries?

It's a tool that allows the IP address of anonymous editors of the site to be wasily checked.  It quickly exposes examples of self-interested editing by the prominent businesses and governments around the world.

1. How do you use Wikipedia in your personal life?

I use it for basic knowledge.  I use it pretty frequently to look up people, places, and events.

2. What do you think the value of Wikipedia is for classroom teachers?  

It is a quick reference tool for teachers to look up random info.

Answer the following questions to see how reliable a Wikipedia article is.

1. Start with the main page. Does it have any cleanup banners that have been placed there to indicate problems with the article? (A complete list is available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Template_messages/
   Cleanup.)

Any one of the following cleanup banners means the article is an unreliable source:

This article or section has multiple issues.	-
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.	-
The neutrality of this article is disputed.	-
The factual accuracy of this article is disputed.	-
This needs copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone or spelling.	-
This may contain material not appropriate for an encyclopedia.	-
This article only describes one highly specialized aspect of its associated subject.	-
This article requires authentication or verification by an expert.	-
This article or section needs to be updated.	-
This article may not provide balanced geographical coverage on a region.	-
This is missing citations or needs footnotes.	-
This article does not cite any references or sources.	-

2. Read through the article and see if it meets the following requirements:

Is it written in a clear and organized way?	yes
Is the tone neutral (not taking sides)?	yes
Are all important facts referenced (you're told where they come from)?	yes
Does the information provided seem complete or does it look like there are gaps (or just one side of the story)?	complete

3. Scroll down to the article's References and open them in new windows or tabs. Do they seem like reliable sources? (For help in determining the general reliability of a source, check out the Knowing What's What and What's Note: The 5 Ws (and 1 "H") of Cyberspace handout.)
   
   Reliable references:
   http://www.cityofstmarys.com/2440-foreword.pdf
   http://nrhp.focus.nps.gov/natreg/docs/All_Data.html 
3. http://www.census.gov/geo/www/gazetteer/gazette.html
3. http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml
3. 
   Possibly unreliable references:
   
   Definitely unreliable references:
   
    
4. Click on the Discussion tab. How is the article rated on the Rating Scale(Stub, Start, C, B, GA, A, FA)? What issues around the article are being discussed? Do any of them make you doubt the article's reliability?

It has a rating of Start.  There are a couple of things debated but nothing  that would make me doubt the reliability.

---

---

---

5. Based on the above questions, give the article an overall ranking ofReliable, Partially Reliable or Unreliable.

• You may use a Reliable article as a source (but remember that even if a Wikipedia article is reliable, it should never be your only source on a topic!)
• You may use a Partially Reliable article as a starting point for your research, and may use some
  of its references as sources, but do not us it as a source.
• You should not use an Unreliable article as a source or a starting point. Research the same topic in a different encyclopedia.

How did you rank this article (Reliable, Partially Reliable or Unreliable)? Give at least three reasons to support
your answer.
I think that it is reliable because it gives facts, is not opinionated, and it's sources are reliable.

---

---