Poll: Do you trust "Wikipedia"

[DanielPowell33]

Do you think "Wikipedia" is a reliable source of info.

I know anyone can go edit "Wikipedia", but I don't think people really go and put in false info. that much. I use it mostly to find out videogam release dates, and to my knowledge its never been wrong.

What do u think......

 

[SnowCold]

Yes, and please put some more effort into your threads next time

 

[pipboy2010]

Pretty much, though if it was something important I'd double check it elsewhere.

I love the way you've put "Wikipedia" in those inverted commas, as if you're not even quite sure you can trust the name. Or that it's real at all.

 

[Armored Prayer]

Yeah its reliable.

 

[TheThinker]

Yes, unless you are completely retarded you can use your common sense to judge if something is factual. If in doubt, look for multiple sources and source their information.

You should never believe everything you read, but a little thought means you shouldn't have to.

 

[Zacharine]

Third option:Maybe.

I trust it as far as I can verify it. It's good for checking out those pieces of trivia you were not entirely too sure of or finding sources on an unfamiliar subject.

But if I'm writing any important report, or heaven forbid a thesis, and I have wikipedia listed as a source... I will shoot myself, just right after the teacher finishes gutting and keelhauling me.

 

[Littaly]

Overall yes. It's excellent when you want an overview or when you're in the dark on something and wish to be enlightened.

School won't allow us to use it for essays and rapports though, which is fully understandable.

 

[Neonbob]

Only for stuff that I don't need to write a paper on.

 

[Cpt_Oblivious]

Yea, but I usually check other websites as well.

 

[bodyklok]

In a word, no, but let me explain why.

You see, Wikiepdia isn't a person or a group of scientist that publish results, in other words they don't say anything, it's not a source, hence it doesn't matter weather I trust them or not because there's nothing to trust them about.

Any reliability in a wiki article comes from the sources they cite, e.g. if you want to know how many units the PS2 has sold and you go to wikipedia to find out, it will tell you it's 138 million and then it will cite a source (in this case an article on kotaku.com).

However, the question 'is Wikipedia reliable' seems to not stem from a question of weather the sources it cites are reliable (which they aren't always) but more a case of the Wikiphiles who edit them, and it is because of this that you should always take a Wikipdia articles perspective (and opinion) with a grain of salt, but you can trust the facts as long as they have a reliable citation.

 

[Nimbus]

Yeah, mostly.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Sure I do. It's just if you're gathering the facts for something important, then you'll want to double check them with more then one source. That was true even before we had internet and still had to use old fashioned text books.

 

[azurawolf]

Yes. I trust it. Most of the time I try to make sure the information is right but I do trust it.

 

[Faps]

I don't trust it 100% but it's a good place to get the basic idea of a subject if you aren't too familiar with it and it's a good place to find other sources from that you can actually use in academic papers.

 

[Queen Michael]

I went to Wikipedia and checked, and it said that Wikipedia is trustworthy, so there you have it.
But then it said it wasn't and then it said Cthulhu was going to eat us all, and then it said it was reliable, just like it said before. So as far as I can gather, Wikipedia is trustworthy and we're all doomed.

 

[Cargando]

While one person may err in judgement a little too much or too little, the average of a group's knowledge is generally correct.

 

[Mertruve]

Do you think "Wikipedia" is a reliable source of info.

It's not, because it's NOT A SOURCE. Wikipedia forbids original research, every article is supposed to use (and list) third-party sources.

That said, it's reliable.

 

[wrecker77]

yeah. Its not that people dont screw with it, because they do. Its because there are people who go around checking articles for bunk information. And most threds are getting protection from things like biased users. So you cant go onto the ps3 page and say its sold 100 systems since launch and it has 1 exclusive, which is bullshit and theirfore, removed instantly.