in Questions

Are Wikipedia Entries Credible?

I’ve spoken with several people recently who discounted heavily the trustworthiness of any Wikipedia entry. Citing the fact that anybody can edit articles.

Do you trust the Wikipedia and if not, what do you trust?

Write a Comment

Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. I think they are, for the most part. However, I’ve seen some entries where it was obvious the entry was added to benefit someone. as in a veiled ad.

    Where I think the real lack of credibility is at issue though is with those who would use Wikipedia as their one and only source for information or research.

  2. I was always skeptical about Wikipedia’s credibility, but during the last few years, I have begun trusting it more and more. Nature released a study a couple years ago where they found that randomly chosen Wikipedia pages contained about the same number of errors as Encyclopedia Britannica.
    http://google.com/search?q=nature+wikipedia+britannica+ap

    Personally, I find Wikipedia to be a great resource for pop culture and historical information. As much as I like to utilize Wikipedia, I agree that it should always be subjected to verification and should not be anyone’s “one and only source for information or research.”

  3. I find it credible….in any case, no matter where you are looking for information it always helps to look in multiple areas and have multiple sources. Most of the time, Wiki will site their sources at the bottom of the page and you can confirm them. Plus, they include a warning at the top of pages where information may be in dispute.

    So kids in school, it shouldn’t be the only source, but it is a great place to start. Wiki-away my friends…Wiki Wiki wah.

  4. That also reminds me of that episode of The Office where Michael got those examples of how to negotiate salary from wikipedia (ie, leaving the room, talking softly so no one can hear you, waiting for someone else to say the first word, etc). I remember after seeing this episode checking wikipedia for fun to see if they were there – and they were. Turns out that those were added by someone right after they saw the show on the East coast. (http://tv.msn.com/tv/article.aspx?news=258319&GT1=7703) Looks like the Daily Show correspondents love that wikipedia!

  5. I don’t find it credible for things that are highly debatable such as religious / social issues. There are radicals on both sides that are capable of making an article left or right leaning and thusly misinforming the public..