« Penguin Podcasts - A Christmas Carol | Home | Baby Boomers turning 60 - US Census Bureau »
Wikipedia - a credible source?
So, what exactly is Wikipedia and, maybe more importantly, is it a credible source?
First, what exactly is Wikipedia?
Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia that can be edited by anyone. Or, according to Wikipedia's introduction page:
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia written collaboratively by many of its readers. Lots of people are constantly improving Wikipedia, making thousands of changes an hour, all of which are recorded on article histories and recent changes. Inappropriate changes are usually removed quickly.
The wiki model is set up to allow anyone can edit the content, allowing everyone to contribute to the development of information. Beyond this, all changes to the content are saved as previous versions, so that users can compare current content with previous content. This also helps reduce vandalism, since previous pages can be restored fairly quickly.
Currently there are some 866,598 article on Wikipedia in English and over 3.7 million articles in 200 languages. There have been 32,372,301 edits since July 2002 with an average of 11.33 edits per page. Although anyone can edit a page, users can also register, and there are 688,968 registered users.
What about credibility?
In terms of credibility, since anyone can edit the content on Wikipedia, its content should probably be used with a critical eye. There is no telling whether the person who last edited the page was really a knowledgeable expert or someone without any real knowledge of the subject mater who just wanted to edit the page or someone in between. Also, since posting often occurs anonymously, there is a lack of accountability that increases the questions about credibility.
The best approach might be to use Wikipedia as a starting point, using the information found there to do further research with more credible sources.
The case in point is the fake information added by Brian Chase, who has since apologized, which alleged that journalist John Seigenthaler was involved in the assassination of Robert Kennedy.
This event led to some widespread questions about the credibility of Wikipedia which are certainly justified. However, while there will always be legitimate concerns about the credibility of the information on hand (and it really should be confirmed by another party), the truth about the accuracy of the articles in Wikipedia might surprise you.
Nature recently investigated Wikipedia and compared it (in the article, Internet encyclopaedias go head to head by Jim Giles) to Encyclopaedia Britannica, and they discovered, discovered that
The exercise revealed numerous errors in both encyclopaedias, but among 42 entries tested, the difference in accuracy was not particularly great: the average science entry in Wikipedia contained around four inaccuracies; Britannica, about three.
Needless to say, an average of four inaccuracies per entry is more than enough to suggest additional research, but so would three inaccuracies per entry. The article was hardly a huge endorsement of Wikipedia however, since it was also found that articles were often poorly written and confusing. Fans of Wikipedia, however, will point to how easily it can be updated and mistakes, once found, can be removed.
The lesson might be that we should always verify information we find both online and in print. And since online resources are often open to questions of credibility, we should take additional steps to verify the accuracy of the information.
So, check your sources, but in the mean time:
The Libraries of The Claremont Colleges provide access to:
Britannica Online
Encyclopedia Americana
And of course, there is always: Wikipedia
And if you are reading Wikipedia and you find something that's inaccurate, you can always change it.
— michael | December 15, 2005 03:45 PM | The more you know
