From time to time, I go to Wikipedia to check out some words and concepts. It seems that everything is embedded in the site.
But, I always double-check things. For example, a good source for this is Answers.com, which licenses its content from well-established content sources.
As for Wikipedia, the worldwide community has the power to make contributions. It's a powerful idea – but certainly subject to risks.
Well, according to a recent report from the AP, Wikipedia is now dealing with the problem. You see, a 24-year-old Wikipedian contributor said he was a professor of theology.
However, after some investigation, it was learned that he was actually a college drop-out.
So, now Wikipedia has a new rule. That is, if someone makes a claim about his or her credentials, there must be verification.
That certainly makes sense to me – and should help with the credibility of the site.
But, despite this, I'm still going to double-check things.
Tom Taulli is the author of various books, including the Complete M&A Handbook and the EDGAR-Online Guide to Decoding Financial Statements.
Closing Bell: When We All Love the PIIGS (NBG, SQNM, PG, ERTS, KO)
Serious Money: Cheapest Stocks List Shrinks from 26 to 21
Chasing Value: Hasbro Earnings Makes My Point
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
3-08-2007 @ 12:39PM
David Monniaux said...
Er... Most of the content on Answers.com seems to come from Wikipedia, sorry.
In any case, you should probably not consult other "general audience" online sources but rather check in bibliographical references (Wikipedia articles should list these). Most online compendiums should not be cited in papers; the same applies to the general audience media (e.g. New York Times), which is often inaccurate when it comes to technological or international issues (areas where they lack expertise).
3-09-2007 @ 1:35AM
Utkarshraj Atmaram said...
"But, I always double-check things. For example, a good source for this is Answers.com"
Actually, Answers.com itself uses Wikipedia as one of its sources (it mirrors the Wikipedia content, which is licensed under GFDL). See http://www.answers.com/main/copyright.jsp
Like David suggests, it's a good idea to check out the references listed at the end of Wikipedia articles. If no references are provided, you should not rely on the content and tag the article with {{unreferenced}} template.