Wikipedia draft and outline

One page Draft:

An online encyclopedia seems like an easier way of looking up definitions without the hassle of lugging around a five or ten pound book. Not only does the site, Wikipedia.org, explain words and events but will redirect the viewer to new or related subjects in seconds. The controversy appears when it must be decided who will write all this information not to mention update it. Wikipedia has allowed anyone who is willing to spend their time defining and updating words to access the site and do so. The debate is how accurate these definitions are and if should they be taken seriously. When searching for a word to be defined by Wikipedia, I knew I wanted something contoversial or relatively hard to explain. I figured this would test Wikipedia’s accuracy and efficiency. At first the word anarchism seemed well-known for it’s general idea but vague when it comes to specifics. After a little research it became apparent that defining the word has been arguable since the 1960’s. George Woodcock has defined the word in his book Anarchism which has repeatedly been used in other published books. It became questionable when the book Anarchism: Nomos XIX suggests Woodcock’s definition is inadequate and an understatement. This made me consider how Wikipedia would define anarchism. Would it be one-dimensional, discreet, opinionated, or even accurate? At first Wikipedia defines anarchism in one sentence but later writes how there are a variety of types of anarchism which may differ in definition or thought. It is being precautious but how will this compare to other dictionaries or encyclopedias? How about published books with historians and theorists who have studied anarchism and tried to define it for years.

Outline:

Hypothesis: Wikipedia’s definition of anarchism: How much of it is factual and is it a reliable source for information?
I. Wikipedia’s sub topics
A. The origin of the word
B. Schools of anarchist thought
C. Individualist anarchism in the
II. Wikipedia’s definition compared to other dictionaries
A. Dictionary.com’s definition; another online resource
B. Webster’s definition; a well-known published book
C. Encyclopedia’s definition; an older source of information
III. Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements by George Woodcock
A. Definition
B. Differences and/or similarities
C. Why this is an authoritative source compared to Wikipedia
IV. Anarchism: Nomos XIX
A. Definition
B. Differences and/or similarities
C. Why this is an authoritative source compared to Wikipedia
V. Wikipedia as a source
A. Author of the entry
B. Diction used
C. Importance of all the information
Conclusion: How does Wikipedia’s definition compare to outside sources? Does the information stand as a reliable source for academic writing?