Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Wikipedia is considered one of the major free content websites, where millions can read, edit, and document what reliable sources say about millions of topics, for free. Therefore Wikipedia takes the effort to provide its readers with well-verified sources. Meticulous fact-checking is an aspect of the broader reliability of Wikipedia.
This is an accepted version of this page This is the latest accepted revision, reviewed on 2 March 2025. For satirical news, see List of satirical news websites. This is a dynamic list and may never be able to satisfy particular standards for completeness. You can help by adding missing items with reliable sources. Fake news websites are those which intentionally, but not necessarily solely ...
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.
To answer this question, some great people have written some explanations and arguments on this page. Everybody should use Wikipedia, either as a source or, if you find deficiencies, as a medium you can make contributions. For comparison, see also Wikipedia: Why Wikipedia is not so great, and Wikipedia: Replies to common objections. You can ...
Screenshot of Wiki-Watch rating of the article Reliability of Wikipedia rated as reliable source and additional orange WikiTrust marks for questionable edits. While experienced editors can view the article history and discussion page, for normal users it is not so easy to check whether information from Wikipedia is reliable.
Some news organizations have used Wikipedia articles as a source for their work. Editors should therefore beware of circular sourcing. [note 3] Whether a specific news story is reliable for a fact or statement should be examined on a case-by-case basis. Multiple sources should not be asserted for any wire service article. Such sources are ...
Wikipedia's editors seek to follow the site's policy about reliable sources, so they oppose the addition of content from unreliable sources. Research with social media [14] [15] [16] [18] [17] shows a clear conservative partisan bias includes a reliance on such unreliable sources. That research found a tendency to suspend conservatives more ...
Wikipedia's credibility has improved during its lifetime. Wikipedia allows anyone to edit its contents and this can undermine its credibility. An illustrious professor could post content and a "troll" or uninformed individual could easily overwrite it, with or without a malicious agenda. Wikipedia addresses this concern with internal ...