This is like an advertisement.  Was it sponsored by Wikipedia?  I wish Wadewitz would address criticisms of Wikipedia, and defend why she believes it is a good teaching tool.  It's been a few years since I was a student, but I never had a professor who would have accepted it as a valid reference.  This attitude can't have changed *that* much in recent years.

I love Wikipedia, I respect the philosophy behind it, and I use it all the time.  But if I were using Wikipedia for an academic or professional reason, I would tread more carefully.  There's a lot of questionable information on it, and the editing process can be troublesome.  It's unsatisfactory that a college professor is endorsing Wikipedia as a powerful teaching tool without explaining why and how to use it effectively to students and her peers.

Way back in 2006, I used a wikipedia writing assignment as an extra credit project for students in my Bioarchaeology course, as there were so many terms we routinely used that weren't (and still aren't) found in wikipedia.  One student tackled paleodemography, and most of this article is still his work, even 7 years later.

I tried the assignment again in 2011 after reading this article on how writing for wikipedia can improve students' work, but I let the students write within a non-public course wiki.  Didn't go over too well.  Most wanted to know why they had to write within this new wiki-format rather than writing a traditional paper.  No amount of discussion of information creation convinced them that wiki-writing was a useful skill to develop.

So, it's nice to see other instructors using this as a teaching tool.  It doesn't work for all classes, but it's nice when it does work, because wikipedia gets better and the students feel good about creating something useful.

I tried using writing a wiki entry as an optional assignment in one of my courses but had the logistical problem that the entry changed faster than I could track my students' contributions -- it frustrated students that their work would be changed before I could look at it. But I'm sure that was my own unfamiliarity with the format and am looking forward to using it again when I next teach a course where such assignments make sense. 
As to the comment that Wikipedia is not academically acceptable, there has been a fair bit of research in recent years demonstrating that much of it is accurate, though the consumer needs to be cautious not to accept anything without verifying the information from other sources (a good practice with any source!) I encourage students to use Wikipedia to get a quick overview of any new topic, though expect them to go into greater depth and more scholarly sources for their detailed work.
But a second point here is that it is UNACCEPTABLE for scholars to complain that this or that entry is filled with errors -- and not then immediately themselves go an correct it! 40% (or more) of most Universities professors wages go for research function, which includes the dissemination of their research results. In my view they have a responsibility to share their expertise and research results through venues like Wikipedia. Just publishing articles in scholarly journals is not sufficient -- we serve no public purpose if we just talk to ourselves. At some point our research needs to be disseminated to the public and our expertise made available to the masses. University professors are well paid for their knowledge by public institutions; they own it to tax payers to do the occasional wikipedia entry. If not them who? (And, to be fair, university deans need to see wikipedia entries as at least 'service' if not publishing)

My Sociology of Gender students updated what used to be the very sad page on Sociology of Gender. They loved being able to contribute to wider knowledge. It was a fantastic project I'd use again!

READ THIS: 
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=458644850859312&set=a.130134130377054.20558.100001414041036&type=1&theater

That's fantastic to hear about Adrianne Wadewitz's recognition on Wikipedia and her innovative approach to incorporating Wikipedia writing into her classes. It's truly inspiring to see educators embracing new teaching tools that not only engage students but also contribute to the broader knowledge-sharing community. Utilizing Wikipedia as a teaching tool not only empowers students to contribute to a valuable resource but also fosters critical thinking and research skills. Adrianne's dedication to leveraging Wikipedia for educational purposes underscores its potential as a powerful learning platform. If you're interested in further enhancing your online presence and reputation, especially in academic or professional circles, you may find valuable insights in the realm of online reputation management for individuals.