The question of reliability of Wikipedia is being discussed for a number of years. Some people claim that they find numerous mistakes while using the encyclopedia; the others say that the information is rather reliable. However, nobody can give a certain answer to it.
Wikipedia was founded in 2001 as “an effort to create and distribute a free encyclopedia of the highest possible quality to every single person on the planet in their own language” (Jimmy Wales, “Wikipedia is an encyclopedia“, March 8 2005, wikipedia-l@wikimedia.org).The system is based on software that allows anybody make changes in the articles. This aspect makes people doubt the reliability of the encyclopedia.
The British journal “Nature” tested a range of different scientific entries in Wikipedia on both works and references. Surprisingly, only a couple of mistakes were found.
“We’re very pleased with the results and we’re hoping it will focus people’s attention on overall level of our wok, which is pretty good”, said Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4530930.stm)
A very well known scandal has occurred about Wikipedia recently. It turned out that one of the editors working on the site’s arbitration committee recruited by the Wikipedia staff was not who he claimed to be. This is how he used to describe himself: “I am a tenured professor of theology at a private university in the eastern United States; I teach both undergraduate and graduate theology.
My Academic Degrees:
* Bachelor of Arts in Religious Studies (B.A.)
* Master of Arts in Religion (M.A.R.)
* Doctorate of Philosophy in Theology (Ph.D.)(http://www.metafilter.com/59052/On-Wikipedia-no-one-knows-youre-a-24yearold-with-no-credentials)
“In fact Essjay was actually Ryan Jordan, a 24-year-old from Kentucky with no advanced degrees who used texts such as Catholicism for Dummies to help him correct articles on the penitential rite or transubstantiation.“ (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/06/wwiki106.xml)
In conclusion, I would like to use a quote:
“Be careful how you use Wikipedia. It really isn’t a trusted source. It really is edited real-time and it could be full of mistakes. That really isn’t the right role for an encyclopedia in the educational process. I think it basically should be fine in schools, it should be acceptable, to add a footnote saying I did a lot of my preliminary research in Wikipedia just to acknowledge where you got a lot of knowledge. But in terms of citing specific facts, you really should go to the sources and look it up there. Because that’s what you’re supposed to be doing. The encyclopedia is supposed to give you the broad overview not be a primary research tool.“http://technosavvy.org/2007/02/23/jimbo-on-wikipedia-reliability/


