Given the fact that many people use Wikipedia , we should ask: Can we trust it? The empirical evidence suggests that Wikipedia articles are sometimes quite good but that they vary a great deal. As such, it is wrong to ask for a monolithic verdict on Wikipedia . Interacting with Wikipedia involves assessing where it is likely to be reliable and where not. I identify five strategies that we use to assess claims from other sources and argue that, to a greater of lesser degree, Wikipedia frustrates all of them. Interacting responsibly with something like Wikipedia requires new epistemic methods and strategies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
P. D. Magnus (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: