Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This is an accepted version of this page This is the latest accepted revision, reviewed on 28 December 2024. Controversy surrounding the online encyclopedia Wikipedia This article relies excessively on references to primary sources. Please improve this article by adding secondary or tertiary sources. Find sources: "Criticism of Wikipedia" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR ...
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, the site has faced several controversies. Wikipedia's open-editing model, under which anyone can edit most articles, has led to concerns ...
(The current list of proposed usability improvements includes 9 separate proposals concerning the text editor and the editing process, so this issue is not unknown in the Wikipedia community.) [1] There may be many people out there who would like to contribute but can't, perhaps especially women – Wikipedia is dominated by male editors.
None of the answers from Wikipedia were determined factually inaccurate, while they found four inaccurate answers in MDR. But the researchers found 48 errors of omission in the Wikipedia entries, compared to 14 for MDR. The lead investigator concluded: "I think that these errors of omission can be just as dangerous [as inaccuracies]", and he ...
Alternative online encyclopedias have been proposed as replacements for Wikipedia, including WolframAlpha, [1] as well as the both now-defunct Knol (from Google) [2] [3] and Owl (from AOL). [4] A 2013 review raised alarms regarding Wikipedia's shortcomings on hoaxes , on vandalism , an imbalance of material, and inadequate quality control of ...
Throughout its history, Wikipedia has struggled to maintain a balance between allowing the freedom of open editing and protecting the accuracy of its information when false information can be potentially damaging to its subjects. [1] Vandalism is easy to commit on Wikipedia, because anyone can edit the site, [2] [3] with the exception of ...
Research papers, particularly the one research paper students write in their eleventh grade, have always been an integral part of high school education [4].They stress the need to verify information and teach students how to evaluate sources critically, and as a result, teachers have developed various criteria to help students identify credible sources, an especially important skill in the ...
Wikipedia can be a fun place, a stimulating forum, and an addictive hobby. It can also be a threat vector for safety, security, and privacy. While most editors will not encounter any more than minor annoyances from people they disagree with, some people will become targets of harassment, or in extreme cases, violence or imprisonment.