Wikipedia as Source of Information

Wikipedia as Source of Information

The reliability of Wikipedia as source of information has been controversial since its foundation 10 years ago. In our team discussion both accuracy and reliability were the main subjects brought up by the elements against its use for research. The defendants of its use argued that Wikipedia should be used for an initial study owing to its large data content.

Many authors defend the use of Wikipedia as a start point for research and to acquire knowledge; however, its accuracy and reliability flaws are the main concern in the academic world. Wikipedia is known for being "the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit" (National Public Radio, 2011, para. 1). This and other attributes does not entitle its use for academic research, but because of its over 3.5 million articles and access speed Wikipedia is a valid source for gaining initial information.

On the week of Wikipedia's 10th anniversary the National Public Radio (NPR) interviewed its fans on Facebook and Twitter and asked the most interesting things they learned through Wikipedia. The responses varied from how users found the whereabouts of old boyfriends that became a public figure in Greece to the legend of cactus cats who cuts open cacti and drink its juice, becoming drunk (National Public Radio, 2011). It is undeniable the amount of interesting source of information that one can obtain from the website, yet it is the validity of the information that concerns scholars when these information are used in academic research.

Wikipedia in its own webpage, in the About Wikipedia section (Wikipedia, 2011) states that "Users should be aware that not all articles are of encyclopedic quality from the start: they may contain false or debatable information" (para. 7). "Allowing anyone to edit Wikipedia means that it is more easily vandalized or susceptible to unchecked information, which requires removal" (para. 10). Additionally it states that "Wikipedia is written largely by amateurs. Those with expert credentials are given no additional weight" (para. 10). Among its strengths Wikipedia emphasize that it is "open to a large contributor base, drawing a large number of editors from diverse backgrounds. This allows Wikipedia to significantly reduce regional and cultural bias found in many other publications" (para. 10).

Considering the importance and weight given to academic research these statements understandably concern scholars regarding the credentials and validity of the information retrieved from this source, and in some institutions students are not allowed to cite Wikipedia in their papers.

In his book The Curious Researcher. A Guide to Writing Research Papers, Bruce Ballenger (2009) highlights that the most important criteria for using any source of academic paper are accuracy and reliability and Wikipedia potentially violates both and for this reason it should