Is Wikipedia a reliable source?
- conley39Lv 73 months agoBest answer
No, It's not. There's a lot of misinformation.
- Elaine MLv 73 months ago
Most of it is, but not enough to use it as a connection on term papers or a scientific report.
- MarliLv 73 months ago
Some entries are and some are not. Wikipedia will warn readers with a "buyer beware sort of notice" if, in its opinion, the entry seems iffy or needs citations. Check the citations provided at the bottom of the article. Don't take it as the only source unless you can't find others, and even then, be skeptical.
Rule of reference librarians: find two or more sources for every answer you give.
- SharonLv 63 months ago
depends. Scientific and literary articles are usually good, although in a famous incident Philip Roth pointed out an error in the article about one of his books, and the editor rejected his correction as being from an undependable source! Deep history normally is safe. Problem is occasional trolls will deliberately mess up an article and you see it before it is corrected, and political, commercial and religious articles are vulnerable.
- What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
- 3 months ago
Partially reliable, as contribution can be made by anyone.
- ObserverLv 73 months ago
I would check the sources because anyone can and do provide information on the site.
- The Football GodLv 73 months ago
It's as accurate as the information it collects. Nothing is infallible.
- 3 months ago
i think it is, without it many online would be lost.
- NancyLv 63 months ago
It is when you are using material that appears as sourced and you have investigated that source, so the same as anything else.
- .Lv 73 months ago
But the claim that "anyone can edit it" is somewhat overstated. The are protections in place against vandalism. If you're looking for a basic fact, it's usually correct. But don't use Wikipedia in a formal research paper.
- ThomasLv 43 months ago
Since it can be edited by anyone, no.