Viktor
Diamond Member
- Sep 21, 2013
- 5,848
- 6,595
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia
The inclusion of false or fabricated content has, at times, lasted for years on Wikipedia due to its volunteer editorship.[8][9] Its editing model facilitates multiple systemic biases: namely, selection bias, inclusion bias, participation bias, and group-think bias.
An ideological bias on Wikipedia has been also identified on both conscious and subconscious levels. A series of studies from Harvard Business School in 2012 and 2014 found Wikipedia "significantly more biased" than Encyclopædia Britannica
The prevalence of non-neutral or conflict-of-interest editing and the use of Wikipedia for "revenge editing" has attracted publicity for inserting false, biased, or defamatory content into articles, especially biographies of living people.
https://apuedge.com › why-you-cannot-use-wikipedia-a...
Wikipedia is not considered scholarly · Wikipedia acknowledges that its information is not properly vetted · The site has included hoaxes
The inclusion of false or fabricated content has, at times, lasted for years on Wikipedia due to its volunteer editorship.[8][9] Its editing model facilitates multiple systemic biases: namely, selection bias, inclusion bias, participation bias, and group-think bias.
An ideological bias on Wikipedia has been also identified on both conscious and subconscious levels. A series of studies from Harvard Business School in 2012 and 2014 found Wikipedia "significantly more biased" than Encyclopædia Britannica
The prevalence of non-neutral or conflict-of-interest editing and the use of Wikipedia for "revenge editing" has attracted publicity for inserting false, biased, or defamatory content into articles, especially biographies of living people.
Why You Cannot Use Wikipedia as an Academic Source
https://apuedge.com › why-you-cannot-use-wikipedia-a...
Wikipedia is not considered scholarly · Wikipedia acknowledges that its information is not properly vetted · The site has included hoaxes
