Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
John Seigenthaler, an American journalist, was the subject of a defamatory Wikipedia hoax article in May 2005. The hoax raised questions about the reliability of Wikipedia and other websites with user-generated content. Since the launch of Wikipedia in 2001, it has faced several controversies. Wikipedia's open-editing model, which allows any user to edit its encyclopedic pages, has led to ...
Sources Conservative Beaver conservativebeaver.com Defunct Published false anti-vaccination claims related to Pfizer, leading to Pfizer filing a petition to compel the site host to reveal the site owner's identity. [15] The Red Panther theredpanther.com Defunct Former name of Toronto Today. As of 2024, is now an e-commerce site. [15] Toronto99.com
The content guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources makes these statements: The reliability of a source depends on context. Each source must be carefully weighed to judge whether it is reliable for the statement being made and is the best such source for that context.
A reliable newspaper quotes a victorious athlete as saying "Today is one of the greatest days in my life". Years later, an obituary in another paper renders the quote as "Today is the greatest day of my life". A contemporaneous source makes a claim that is explicitly called out as wrong by reliable non-contemporaneous sources.
a list of sources that have never been discussed, or whose reliability should be obvious to most editors; a list of primary, secondary, or tertiary sources; a list of independent or affiliated sources; a list of self-published and non–self-published sources; a representative sample of all sources used on Wikipedia or all sources in existence
If you see an article that may be inaccurate, you should do the following: Correct it yourself if you can. Add citations to reliable sources to verify the information. If the neutrality of the content is in question, see Wikipedia:NPOV dispute for more details about how to handle it. If only a few statements seem inaccurate, see Disputed statement.
The guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources gives general advice on what is and isn't a reliable source; this essay aims to analyse specific examples of sources that might initially appear to be reliable, yet may not be. If in doubt about a source, discuss this at the reliable sources noticeboard.
Not so. The better Wikipedia is written and sourced, the more people rely on it, and the more they believe it. Despite disclaimers, people do use Wikipedia to make medical, financial, political, and other decisions with serious potential consequences, even though they should not. We have a duty to get it right, as best with can, with the best ...