Jump to content

Talk:Reliability of Wikipedia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 69.172.176.96 (talk) at 20:34, 21 July 2020. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconWikipedia B‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Wikipedia.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia articles
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
This is not the page to discuss whether a source in an article is reliable.
If you want to do that, go to WP:RSN or the talk page of the article in question.

Consider changing

"An empirical study conducted in 2006 by a [[Nottingham University]] Business School lecturer in Information Systems" to "An empirical study conducted in 2006 by a [[University of Nottingham]] Business School lecturer in Information Systems" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.145.207.81 (talk) 05:47, 27 June 2018‎ (UTC)[reply]

Possibly balancing

While there is a lot of criticism about hoaxes, Wikipedia is also lately used by Google and Youtube for its ability and reputation to curb hoaxes (with Wikipedia's community's ability to quickly remove them being praised). Potential source:

—PaleoNeonate – 15:40, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

More related information: here. —PaleoNeonate – 10:02, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And [1] so likely a bit soon, but related news are expected... —PaleoNeonate – 17:16, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Adding [2] —PaleoNeonate – 23:13, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
More: [3] —PaleoNeonate – 22:41, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Larry Sanger and Wikipedia bias

Larry Sanger wrote on wiki bias here (https://larrysanger.org/2020/05/wikipedia-is-badly-biased/). Worthwhile adding this link to further reading or external links?? --1.152.111.77 (talk) 19:42, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if that's a very convincing article. OTOH, any notion that WP should be considered as "reliable" is misplaced. One should only "rely" on WP to the extent that one would rely on what you heard from a "friend of a friend". You might be able to decide that the chance that somebody is intentionally hoaxing you is low enough that you can trust it for your personal purposes, but if you're passing this information on for others to use, you need to actually verify it first. This seems to be a blind spot in this article. =Fabrickator (talk) 07:35, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regional bias

This article and its linked study have some really good data on geographic bias in Wikipedia:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/15/wikipedia-view-of-the-world-is-still-written-by-the-west

I did not find any references to that study/article, or any equivalent documentation of the bias it describes, while skimming this article.

Fixing that bias across all of Wikipedia would be hard, but it could theoretically be mitigated a lot just by including data about it somewhere on Wikipedia itself.

69.172.176.96 (talk) 20:33, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Reliability_of_Wikipedia&oldid=968838931"