Every once in a while, I'll read a newspaper article that says "According to Wikipedia..." I'm always struck by the ridiculousness of this. No one should be citing Wikipedia. People (students, journalists, anyone) should be citing the sources that Wikipedia provides as footnotes. Well, the American Journalism Review has a piece asking editors' their feelings about citing Wikipedia, and I think it could be a great starting point for teachers and students talking about research and citation. Here's an excerpt from the article:

• The editor: John Leach, managing editor for news and digital media, the Arizona Republic and azcentral.com

• The story: In August 2007 the Republic published a story about an Arizona congressman, Republican Rep. Rick Renzi, whose background was described as "somewhat of a mystery." The piece quoted Wikipedia as well as other sources.

• The editor's comment: "The Wikipedia.com reference in the story about Rep. Rick Renzi was discussed by editors here before we used it in the paper and online, and our point in using it in the story was that the limited Wikipedia listing about Renzi shows how little was known about his background. That, however, led to a discussion about the use of Wikipedia in our stories, and we adopted a policy that says Wikipedia is not to be used as a prime reference source but could be used as a starting point in our reporting and fact-checking."