Why is it that a lot of people on here rely on wikipedia when anyone can make changes in its listings?

Question

I know that Wikipedia is the default search engine on answers, but has people just become lazy or what? Its entirely possible for people to alter Wikipedia listings and then cite that as a source on here.

Does anyone have a problem with that?

My main concern is, hasn't wikipedia made people more lazy from doing real research?

I'm clearly not satisfied with the responses thus far. Should wikipedia be the final say in determining correct responses on answers?

Answer 1

If you read through the Wikipedia instructions when adding or deleting information, they ask for provable citations, which simply means you list your sources. Someone eventually checks up on those sources and if they prove faulty or misleading, they are removed and any additional information you add is suspect and eventually you are no longer allowed to place information on that site.

There are forums on the site that discuss the validity of the information submitted. Information submitted is evaluated as to content, validity, accuracy. It's not a perfect system, but it certainly is more up-to-date than most encyclopedias.

You can also use Wikipedia as a starting place for further research because it usually gives so many related article listings that are not of Wikipedia. It gives the average person some leads to go elsewhere for information that is free.

As to the reliabiltiy of Wikipedia: Emigh and Herring (2005) [39]in a study of Wikipedia, note that there are not yet many formal studies of Wikipedia or its model. Their main conclusions regarding style and encyclopedic quality were:

Statistically speaking, "the language of Wikipedia entries is as formal as that in the traditional print encyclopedia".
Wikipedia entries are "stylistically homogenous, typically describe only a single, core sense of an item, and are often presented in a standard format" (attributed partly to policies and partly to the norms of conventional print encyclopedias "which Wikipedia effectively emulates")
Wikipedia achieves its results by social means, including self-norming, a core of active and vigilant users watching for problems, and editors' expectations of encyclopedic text drawn from the wider culture.
[edit]
Reliability
Main article: Reliability of Wikipedia
Wikipedia can be assessed for reliability in several areas, including:

Accuracy of information provided within articles
Comprehensiveness, scope and coverage within articles and in the range of articles
Susceptibility to, and exclusion and removal of, false information (a criterion specific to the Wikipedia process)
Susceptibility to editorial and systemic bias
Identification of reputable third party source references (citations)

Hope this helps, good luck.

Answer 2

"Hasn't wikipedia made people more lazy from doing real research?"

Well, if all are already there, why do we have to research? It's saving our time.

Answer 3

As a community forum, if someone made erroneous changes - someone could correct them and have that person banned.

Answer 4

i think is better then other search and it provide us with much accurate and answer