Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Fandom, on the other hand, allows content on just about anything and often lacks reliable sources. Many Fandom wikis include content disclaimers, trigger warnings, and spoiler warnings on individual articles. However, all pages on Wikipedia are covered by one content disclaimer, thus Wikipedia does not include disclaimers on a per-page basis ...
Fandom wikis are hosted under the domain fandom.com, which has become one of the top 50 most visited websites in the world, rapidly rising in popularity beginning in the early 2020s. It ranks as the 50th as of October 2023, with 25.79% of its traffic coming from the United States , followed by Russia with 7.76%, according to Similarweb .
Fan-oriented articles may also include laudatory quotes about the greatness of an actor or singer sourced from a fan-edited website. User-edited fan websites where any anonymous person can post any text she wants are not a reliable source, and should not be used on Wikipedia.
Wikipedia is not a place to publish your own thoughts and analyses or new information. Per the policy on original research, do not use Wikipedia for any of the following: Primary (original) research, such as proposing theories and solutions, communicating original ideas, offering novel definitions of terms, coining new words, etc.
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.
The following presents a non-exhaustive list of sources whose reliability and use on Wikipedia are frequently discussed. This list summarizes prior consensus and consolidates links to the most in-depth and recent discussions from the reliable sources noticeboard and elsewhere on Wikipedia.
As an electronic publication, Wikipedia can and should be up to date, but Wikipedia is not a newspaper and it does not need to go into all details of a current event in real time. It is better to wait a day or two after an event before adding details to the encyclopedia, than to help spread potentially false rumors.
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 ...