Justifying The Accuracy of Wikipedia

Wikipedia doesn’t have a sound prestige in being the reliable source; this is particularly understood when the students are asked to complete a thesis. Since the majority of professor discourage resources from Wikipedia.  But how the situation went on to be like this. Indeed, no one can forget the time when Wikipedia was known as the best online source of information.


How Wikipedia Reached to this Fame?

The strength of Wikipedia is, unquestionably the fact that any subject can make its way on the website. This is the reason why Wikipedia is known as the hub of knowledge. Hence the first disposition of keen and distracted student is to search for immediate help from Wikipedia. Since everyone knows that it’s the website that has the information for anything that can come up. So this was the reason that earned Wikipedia such fame.

In the book of Axel Bruns, he claims that the websites’ stimulating user guides and policies are the real cause of popularity, which means that the website welcomes the alliances among different authors who are willing to evaluate others articles with a shared objective of its improvement. This is the reason the site has become the most famous among any other encyclopedias. Since Wikipedia is an open source platform so there are no limitations for who can make a contribution or write an article. Hence creators of the websites have no wrongful or hidden intentions in mind. The only desire of the founders is to lead Wikipedia to success so that it can be the sole standing source to provide free information to every part of the world and for a greater extent the objective produced better outcomes. Still, there are always critics who stand opposing the freedom that is given to them. 

The turning point of Wikipedia

As discussed earlier Wikipedia may not control, who can make contributions to the website? There is no limitation for being hardworking professional and an expert to make contributions. Wikipedia articles are written under the false names at times when celebrities and political bodies and Wikipedia Page Creation Service make edits in the articles to remove the false claims that are written about them. Is the content well planned? No, so this means even you can go to Wikipedia and edit the information of your interest.

Subsequently, the rumor became public for a majority of individuals have made it as the means of entertainment to edit articles. It’s a fact that several among us at the very least know at least a single person who has been a part of Wikipedia making contributions or editing the content. Therefore the reliability of the website initiated to minimize similar to the positive reputation. This reveals how unreliable Wikipedia is. But the accuracy cannot be justified with this point. 

How truthful is Wikipedia?

It’s understandable why the universal rumor prevails that not to trust Wikipedia. It’s quite easy to assume that the website is not the most accurate since anyone from any place can go online and make contributions in the contents hence making the information on the Wikipedia appear false and inaccurate. 

What is the need for it?

A way to avoid risking the plagiarism of incomplete information from Wikipedia is lead with the links in the reference box. That is more likely to be taken from the scholarly journals and the website that fundamentally hold the information that is factual and correct. However, what about the content on Wikipedia? Upon research, it came up that Wikipedia may not be 100% accurate in a handful of subjects. However, when compared to the information with one from the Encyclopedia Britannica, the online encyclopedia is a more intellectual one with many accurate and factual information. Neither any website has stood the winner, but instead, there was a tie.


In a nutshell

Wikipedia goes through a higher level of criticism to the day. However, it’s still defensible? The answer to the question can be in agreement or not. Wikipedia is more or less scholarly, however, only for the handful of the subject. If one desires to research more on the famous personality’s biography, maybe it is not the best option as it may contain the promotional material. But, even if one tries to research for the scientific articles, Wikipedia may not be the place you always wanted to go. It may contain incomplete information, and one never knows how much of the data is based on the fact. The reason being the best decisions rest on the scholarly journals, peer reviews, textbooks, and articles

Post a Comment