Govvy / Member

Forum Posts Following Followers
462 51 32

Is wikipedia a reliable source?

For a few entries recently I have made to for updating people's profiles I have had some that haven't been accepted based on the fact that wikipedia is not a reliable source.

You may say this is the case for some area's. But I would tend to disagree and feel that certain area's of the internet have been anti wiki from the start. Considering that wikipedia is now one of the most administered websites on record it would be very hard to write incorrect content without someone seeing it. Each area is monitored from each different group. Everyone has their favorite pages on wikipedia which they like to keep clean of vandalism and incorrect information.

So to say wikipedia is not a reliable source is very incorrect and very wrong. I would tend to go with wikipedia is more reliable and more upto date than it has been since it first started. I would now tend to say that wikipedia is more reliable to look up star profiles than and that is getting behind the times on a hell of a lot of star profiles.

I have noticed that a lot of stars have been repeated there is more one profile for some stars, maybe even 4 or 5 profiles for one star alone. I certainly have noticed this when entering data for wrestler profiles. So many need fixing, so many celebrities that don't have their correct credits deserved. I have done some, but there is so much to fix of what I have noticed it would take at least a solid half a years work to sort out. This is when wikipedia would make sure that that star has already been added and would even of been monitored.

So at present I am going to say that wikipedia is now a more reliable source than