Purpose The purpose of this paper is to report on a research study that entailed the rigorous evaluation of the quality of a large multidisciplinary sample of Wikipedia articles. The objective of the paper is to assess whether Wikipedia can be used and recommended as a credible reference or information tool. Design/methodology/approach The 106 randomly generated Wikipedia articles are analyzed and evaluated on specific criteria (completeness, accuracy, presentation, objectivity, and overall quality). Articles are reviewed from a broad range of subject areas: arts, popular culture, entertainment, geography, history, science, technology, people, entities, and politics. Findings The findings indicate that overall the articles are objective, clearly presented, reasonably accurate, and complete, although some are poorly written, contain unsubstantiated information, and/or provide shallow coverage of a topic. Research limitations/implications Further research on evaluating Wikipedia entries should include reviewing outward links to more accurately assess overall quality. Practical implications Wikipedia has a role as a reference and instruction tool. Originality/value This paper provides empirical data on a large number of articles on a wide range of disciplines in Wikipedia, supporting its use as an acceptable encyclopedia.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
West et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: