Academic information is often frowned upon for this reason. Also since information on a page can be changed and reworded there is no guarantee that the information used will exist later for either your or another persons use. An encyclopedia is great for getting a general understanding of a subject before you dive into it. But then you do have to dive into your subject; using books and articles and other appropriate sources will provide better research. Research from these sources will be more detailed, more precise, more carefully reasoned, and (in most cases) more broadly peer reviewed than the summary you found in an encyclopedia. These will be the sources you cite in your paper.. There is no need to cite Wikipedia in this case.
The traditional peer review process must be updated to match the rapid creation and diffusion of knowledge that characterizes the 21st century. The Wikipedia concept is a potential model for more rapid and reliable dissemination of scholarly knowledge. The implications of such a concept would have a dramatic effect on the academic community.
The Bibliographic Export tool will easily extract the metadata you need for citations, from a single document or list of search results. From there, the tool will then either provide you with this metadata to plug into other citation machines. You can therefore find the information you need on a wiki and then find the original source. This allows you to not only verify the information given to make sure it came from someplace reliable but it also gives you a book or some other publication that contains more information on the subject you are researching.
This bar always appears on the top right corner for documents and search results. Click on the icon that looks like a book (always the fourth icon from the left) to begin exporting. Published by a reputable university press, or if an article is in a standard academic journal, that means that several professors at some point have considered the information and considered it worthy to publish.
Sourcing a website is a game of chance. Unless you know that the site is run by a respected institution, or if you have verified the information from other (reliable) sources, it is probably a bad idea to cite it.
There are usually two reviewers; a third is sometimes asked if the two disagree. In some fields, three reviewers is the norm. The opinions of these outside reviewers are used in the determination to publish the article, to return it to the author for revision, or to reject the article. (There are many variations on this process, discussed in the article on peer review. Even accepted articles are subject to further (often considerable) editing by the journal before publication. Because of this lengthy process, an accepted article will typically not appear in print until several months
Searchers have a much better ability to locate material that may be of interest. However, it also means that actually trying to read the full-text of such documents — which Google does index — will only be possible for those who have relationships with the publishing sites. Google says, by the way, that it does not earn money off of any new subscriptions generated between searchers and publishers.
The material may have already been available, but if the public didn’t realize this, it remained invisible. More and more, the public continues to turn to search engines to access all types of information. But this move, ironically, may raise more awareness and use of libraries as an important offline research resource.
Review articles are usually solicited from long-standing experts in the field. Some journals are entirely devoted to review articles, others contain a few each issue, but most do not publish review articles at all. Such reviews often cover the research for the preceding year, some for longer or shorter periods; some are devoted to very specific topics, some to general surveys. Some are enumerative, with intent to list all significant articles in a subject. Others are selective; including what they think is worth including. Yet others are evaluative, aiming to give a judgment of the state of progress in the field. Some are published in series, covering each year a complete subject field.