Wikipedia should be a valid source for projects in schools

first to provide my definition of key words. 1.school- 1: an organization that provides instruction: a: an institution for the teaching of children http://www.merriam-webster.com... reasons to prefer my definition over my opponents. 1. fairness- my opponents definition create an unfair debate because there is no way to argue that fish can use wikipedia, so the only way to have a fair and realistic debate is to use my definition. 2. writers' intent- my definition is better because it is the first definition on the page my opponent's is the third meaning the writer of this scource meant for mine to be used over my opponent's 3. framer's intent- the creater of this topic (me) meant for this debate to be about wikipedia being used in schools as i define not as my opponent dose.now this is supported when i say "people in my first speach and have had the meaning of the debate to be towords that. 4. reasonablitty- my difinition is more reasonable because we are people and we could never be able to look at this topic from the point of view of a fish so the only reasonable to look at this is though the veiw of people. to defened against my opponent's attacks 1. my opponent claims that i give no reasons why we should use wiki but extend from me first speach "because of this ability to have quality information on many topics is why we should allow wikipedia o be use for projects in schools" these are two reasons wikipedia should be allowed in schools. 2. group my opponent's 2,3,and,4 arguments. first because of the difinition of school as being "an institution for the teaching of children" none of this arguments aplly to this topic. second there is no reason that fish will not gain the ablity to understand english, and there is evidance that they will. http://theinfosphere.org... the reverse scuba suit appears in the episode of futurama "A Big Piece of Garbage" where the fish reacts to human comands meaning that they have an understanding of the way humans speak. also because it has claws/feet/hands that could be used to type they could use computers while using this suit. and because it allow fish to walk on land they would not die because of being in on spot. this argument still support my side because should mean ought allows the use of wikipedia to be in the future and the present. now to and more support to my arguments 1. wikipedia is as good as Encyclopedia Britannica meaning that if we should be allowed to use Encyclopedia Britannica on project we should be able to use wikipedia http://news.bbc.co.uk... 2. wikipedia has 9.25 million articles meaning that it covers many topics for school projects.http://en.wikipedia.org... 3. evenif wikipedia is change whit false information it is changed quickly.http://en.wikipedia.org... 4.wikipedia is democray at work because people work together to decide what is to be posted and what not meanig that it take many people's points of view in order to get the right information.http://en.wikipedia.org... so to give the voting issuse 1.all my opponent's arguments are based on one definition which i have proven to be wrong so there is no offence against my case 2.becaus i have meet my burden of proof and have give reasons to support the topic that my opponent has not attacked