Final answer:
Wikipedia is not a credible source for academic research because it is not peer-reviewed, and its content is subject to user edits, casting doubt on its authority. Authoritative sources, which include peer-reviewed texts, are preferred in scholarly work, but nonacademic sources can provide valuable context for broader viewpoints.
Step-by-step explanation:
Wikipedia is not considered a credible source because its content can be edited by users and it is not a peer-reviewed platform. Therefore, its authority as a reliable source is questioned. When conducting academic research, it's important to rely on sources that have been evaluated through the peer-review process, such as scholarly journals and publications. These authoritative sources provide a higher level of credibility because they have undergone rigorous scrutiny by experts in the field.
While nonacademic sources such as credible newspapers, official reports, and well-sourced books can provide valuable current events or discoveries, they may not have the same level of narrow and specific focus that peer-reviewed texts do. However, they are often more accessible and offer a broader perspective. Information on the Internet, including on sites like Wikipedia, is largely unregulated, which places the responsibility on the user to evaluate its reliability. Nevertheless, Wikipedia can serve as a starting point to lead researchers to higher-quality material through its bibliographic information and external links.