Ought to You Belief Wikipedia?


  • Wikipedia is on the primary web page of Google search outcomes greater than 50% of the time. 
  • Wikipedia articles have an accuracy price of 80 % in contrast with 95-96 % accuracy of different sources.
  • However anybody can edit Wikipedia, no experience wanted.

All of us use Wikipedia. However how a lot ought to we belief what we learn on Wikipedia? 

Wikipedia is a superb place to begin for on-line analysis. It persistently ranks on the prime of Google search outcomes and has info on nearly each subject. However is Wikipedia a dependable supply? The reply is each sure and no. 

Typically, Wikipedia will be an correct supply of knowledge. It’s up to date repeatedly and accommodates a wealth of information from varied sources (these are two of the primary causes it ranks so excessive in search). Articles which have many editors who’re clearly specialists and that embrace strong citations and references are normally fairly dependable. Articles with much less oversight are typically much less dependable. 

“Wikipedia will not be a dependable supply…. As a user-generated supply, it may be edited by anybody at any time, and any info it accommodates at a specific time might be vandalism, a piece in progress, or just incorrect.”

Wikipedia is an open-source encyclopedia. This implies anybody can edit its pages, which results in wild inconsistencies throughout its pages. With 45,175,790 registered Wikipedia customers, there’s all the time the potential for bias or inaccuracies. 

Due to this fact, when studying info on Wikipedia, it is essential to take the time to confirm the accuracy of the data by on the lookout for different sources that corroborate the details. 

New call-to-action

Why is Wikipedia not a dependable supply?

Journalist Edwin Black characterised the content material of Wikipedia articles as a mix of “reality, half-truth, and a few falsehoods.”

Wikipedia doesn’t require any credentials or expertise to edit. This implies anybody with an web connection can edit and add content material. Many Wikipedia editors are fueled by ardour and hidden agendas, not a need to create unbiased protection.  

3 The reason why Wikipedia will not be a dependable supply:

  • Wikipedia’s enhancing construction
  • Lack of fact-checking 
  • Bias in protection

Wikipedia’s enhancing construction

Wikipedia is edited by Wikipedians, who’re volunteer editors.

Wikipedia editors


This creates a possibility for vigilante editors to try to manage the data that exists on Wikipedia. We’ve seen circumstances the place editors painting sure manufacturers or individuals as they match, whatever the details. As soon as a web page will get on the radar of sure high-ranking editors (who usually have their very own agenda), sustaining a impartial web page will be very troublesome.

>>Click on right here to learn why you should not edit your individual Wikipedia web page<<

Then there are the circumstances of individuals making one-off edits to pages. Working below the guise of anonymity, rogue editors can try so as to add info to Wikipedia pages. We’ve seen nameless editors write a damning sentence about an organization and paste it into quite a few different Wikipedia pages that merely point out the model. Whereas all these edits can get flagged as vandalism and reverted, there are circumstances the place they stick and develop into troublesome to take away from the web page. 

Lack of fact-checking

In contrast to conventional information sources, Wikipedia lacks an official fact-checking construction. As soon as an editor provides a sentence or supply to a Wikipedia article, it’ll stay there till somebody comes alongside and challenges it, no matter its accuracy. Some pages are intently monitored and guarded. Since Wikipedia doesn’t topic its content material to the identical rigorous assessment course of as conventional information sources, errors and omissions can go unnoticed. Relying on who’s enhancing the web page, some Wikipedia pages will likely be extra correct than others.

Bias in protection

Identical to with any media protection, Wikipedia has its personal bias. Relying on the editors’ pursuits, some Wikipedia pages are quick and surface-level, whereas others are in-depth and well-sourced. 

Stephen Colbert coined the time period “Wikiality” on The Colbert Report, which is the concept if you happen to declare one thing to be true and sufficient individuals agree with you, it turns into true. There’s a herd mentality that takes over Wikipedia enhancing, and editors can switch their private biases onto the pages of Wikipedia.

Wikipedia has been criticized for a variety of biases, together with:

  • Gender bias and sexism
  • Partisanship
  • Company bias
  • Scientific disputes
  • Racial bias 

Who owns Wikipedia?

Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales launched Wikipedia on January 15, 2001. In mid-2003, Wales arrange the Wikimedia Basis (WMF), a 501(c)(3) non-profit group that owns Wikipedia at present. Wales is a Wikimedia Basis’s Board of Trustees member and was its official chairman from 2003 by means of 2006. 

The Wikimedia Basis is predicated in San Francisco and is supported by donations and grants. It operates below the mission “to convey free data to everybody.”

Is Britannica a extra dependable supply?

Britannica is taken into account a extra dependable supply than Wikipedia, particularly when citing details and figures. It is because Britannica articles are written by specialists within the discipline, whereas anybody can write Wikipedia articles.

Britannica additionally employs a rigorous editorial course of and opinions each article for accuracy and completeness earlier than publication. 

The controversy between Wikipedia and Britannica has been happening for years and has been the topic of many research. One examine discovered that in nearly all circumstances, Wikipedia was extra left-leaning than Britannica.

The researchers divided articles into classes and located that:

  • Articles on companies have been 11 % extra slanted towards Democrats
  • Authorities articles have been 9 % extra slanted towards Democrats
  • Articles on schooling have been 4 % extra slanted towards Democrats 
  • Articles on immigration have been 4 % extra slanted towards Democrats
  • Articles on civil rights have been 3 % extra slanted towards Democrats

Nonetheless, biases exist all over the place, and the reply to this query actually will depend on context. Wikipedia articles are for much longer than Britannica articles. Once you take a look at the primary 100 phrases of a Wikipedia article, it’ll normally be simply as factual as Britannica. The details start to dilute if you get down into the depths of some Wikipedia articles. 

Is ChatGPT a dependable supply?

ChatGPT is a web-based chatbot service that may provide help to discover solutions to questions on varied subjects. It was launched by OpenAI, an AI and analysis firm, on November 30, 2022. 

It’s the fastest-growing app of all time. In January, solely two months after its launch, UBS evaluation estimated that ChatGPT had 100 million energetic customers. For comparability, it took 9 months for TikTok to succeed in 100 million. 

It’s designed to offer a conversational expertise, permitting customers to ask questions and obtain solutions. Whereas it isn’t an authoritative supply of knowledge, ChatGPT is usually a great tool for rapidly discovering solutions to easy questions, and it may present solutions from sources like Wikipedia and Britannica. 

You will need to notice, nonetheless, that ChatGPT doesn’t all the time present correct and up-to-date info, so it shouldn’t be relied upon for essential choices. Moreover, ChatGPT doesn’t have a human moderator, so inappropriate content material will not be filtered out. 

And typically, ChatGPT will present false info written in the identical definitive tone as the reality. For instance, see the under instance of a query that ChatGPT answered incorrectly. 



5 of the six solutions above are incorrect, however ChatGPT wrote the reply as confidently as if it have been true. This can be a fundamental instance, however you’ll be able to think about how this device might fare on extra advanced or controversial subjects. 

General, ChatGPT is usually a great tool for rapidly discovering solutions to easy questions, however it shouldn’t be used as an authoritative supply of knowledge.

Wikipedia be trusted?

The quick reply to this query is that Wikipedia can normally be trusted. As with most sources, every little thing learn on Wikipedia have to be processed by means of a crucial lens. 

Journalists and lecturers usually use Wikipedia; nonetheless, it’s hardly ever, if ever, used as a sole supply of knowledge. Moreover, every article features a record of citations and references that can be utilized to additional confirm the accuracy of the data. After all, it’s all the time clever to double-check the data you discover on Wikipedia. However general, it may be trusted as a dependable supply of knowledge.

To make sure you kind an correct opinion by means of on-line analysis, you will need to use a number of sources, together with Britannica and Wikipedia. And possibly save ChatGPT for tremendous fast searches or simply for enjoyable. 


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here