Wikipedia credibility?

[suprarx7nut]

So I just realized when I need info on just about anything at all, the first place I look is wikipedia. In school they always tell us that wiki is a horrible place to look for facts as some of it can be edited by users.

Now I'm fully aware of the editing and such, but I would venture a guess and say that 90% of the info there is true. I would never trust it on anything important, but for most facts it seems great.

After all, it's not like the rest of the internet is filled with 100% correct info...

What do you guys think about WIKIPEDIA's credibility?

 

[Poodles]

Need another selection of "yes, but I confirm all sources"

Wikipedia is great, just pay attention to when it says that it doesn't have an sources to back up the info. If there are sources go to them.

I always try and confirm any info through other sources, and I even do this with more reputable sources...

 

[gtsfirefighter]

I can say I mostly trust Wikipedia...mostly.

 

[AF1JZ]

Mostly, but I do verify the results to other sites.

 

[OneJoeZee]

Check the references before you use anything too important as "fact" or "evidence."

In any case, it's better to cite the references instead of the wikipedia page.

 

[GrimJack]

Wikipedia is pretty much dead on as long as you don't look at the controversy subjects. Even those are right at least 50% of the time. You can get a really good idea of the controversy level on any page by looking at the revision history.

 

[Jeff Lange]

I've seen way too much information be off or plain wrong on Wikipedia. I've even seen my own information that I posted get edited by someone to something that is incorrect.

It is neat and has a lot of interesting information, but I don't trust anything on there without a secondary (reliable) source.

Jeff

 

[suprarx7nut]

Sounds like most of you stand about where I do.

I usually use it for curiosities and useless info so I don't *generally* try to source it elsewhere. Although if I need some solid info or something that I may actually use then I'll certainly find more sources to back the point.

What I really like about it though is that you can type virtually ANYTHING into google, add "wiki" and you'll get to the wiki page which will first give you a broad overview of the topic and then proceed with more detail.

 

[Doward]

Like ANY 'source' of information, check into their sources, as well.

Since there's not a "Trust it, as long as the sources check out" option, I put 'mostly'

 

[Shytheed Dumas]

+1 for verifying the source and Doward's comments. As a starting point it is perfect search engine of sorts, but that's as far as I would trust it without verifying the sources.

 

[eman2289]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/wikipedia:general_disclaimer
any site that specifically says that it cannot always be trusted makes me wonder why people dont just use a trusted online encyclopedia.

 

[suprarx7nut]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/wikipedia:general_disclaimer
any site that specifically says that it cannot always be trusted makes me wonder why people dont just use a trusted online encyclopedia.

Do you know of any online, free encyclopedia's that are more trustworthy AND as expansive as Wiki?

If so, let me know!

 

[Jeff Lange]

Because Wikipedia has a lot of information general encyclopedias don't have and gets updated more frequently. That's probably why anyways.

Jeff

 

[Zumtizzle]

I said yes. But it depends on what i'm looking at.

 

[eman2289]

Do you know of any online, free encyclopedia's that are more trustworthy AND as expansive as Wiki?

If so, let me know!

No, but you can use encyclopedia.com or brittanica.com. They may net be as expansive, but all of their info is gone over and approved before it is posted.

 

[Big Wang Bandit]

http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/Main_Page

Best!