I have heard that Wiki's are a very poor source of information that is often not
By ddhawkins63
@ddhawkins63 (682)
United States
June 17, 2009 6:54am CST
I have heard, many times, that Wiki's are not very reliable sources of information. I heard that they are inaccurate, I guess because no one checks to see if the information is correct and anyone can add to them. Is this true. I love Wikipedia. I use it all the time and to hear such disheartening things about it is ashame. What do you all think?
1 person likes this
5 responses
@Canellita (12029)
• United States
19 Jun 09
The information is only as good as the source just like anything else. You have to look around and compare sources and see what's accurate.
1 person likes this
@Canellita (12029)
• United States
19 Jun 09
You should always confirm your info. Just because something appears in a book it doesn't make it accurate or true.
1 person likes this
@ddhawkins63 (682)
• United States
19 Jun 09
Yes, but if you have to look in a bunch of places just to confirm the info, how much do you want to bother with it, you know?
1 person likes this
@khayshenz (1384)
• United States
17 Jun 09
Wikipedia is not a "source" per se - but a source for sources. In technical and collegiate writing, Wikipedia is NOT an acceptable source mainly because it's written by people who may or may NOT have a scholarly degree when it comes to the subject.
With that being said - I used wikipedia a lot when I was in college. Mainly to obtain actual sources - whether that be books, internet, etc. A lot of the legit documentation in Wikipedia is well documented - with sources.
I guess it just depends on what you use it for - general knowledge, just to know what's up - it's good. For collegiate research papers - it's a good starting point. However, I doubt that you can use it as one of your sources. That means you can't qoute it or put it anything of what they said in your paper, unless you have other sources saying so.
@ddhawkins63 (682)
• United States
17 Jun 09
Those are very good points that you brought up!! Thank you very much.
1 person likes this
@sharksfin (1091)
• Philippines
17 Jun 09
Can't tell for certain whether the information is really accurate or not. But, so far, I found them accurate. Yes, it's true that anyone can sign up and add any information they can think of but surely, there are people in charge to moderate the information being added and make any necessary correction. Besides, it's Wikipedia and everyone is relying on this as source of information. Why won't the creator be careful not to mess with their site, right?
1 person likes this
@ddhawkins63 (682)
• United States
17 Jun 09
That would make sense, but the fact remains that many writing sites won't allow you to use wiki for references etc because of so many inaccuracies being found on it. So it makes me wonder when I go to them if the information is correct. Not sure about who checks the information though. That would be interesting to find out.
@stanlee81 (381)
• China
17 Jun 09
Yes,Wiki is also my favorite site when i come across some confusion and in most cases,i could find the info. what i needed.When it comes to the accuracy of the sites,yes,no body and gurantee the info. in it is 100 percent currect and acurate.However,you also could some clues about the subject you are researching.Anyway,i like wiki..
1 person likes this
@ddhawkins63 (682)
• United States
17 Jun 09
I guess that is true. How do we know any of the information on the internet is good or not? We don't, we are taking the word of someone else, right. That can be said in books and other things as well.
@ddhawkins63 (682)
• United States
27 Jul 09
No, nothing is perfect, however when you put sources of information on anything and present it as fact, it should indeed be fact... Right? I mean, wiki's don't present themselves as opinion pieces, they present themselves as factual.
