Is 'Wikipedia' a valid source of information?

21 Answers

  • Anonymous
    9 months ago
    Favorite Answer

    Yes, for the most part. There are some "controversial" items that get a bunch of idiots who try to undermine the information that gets posted. This is the reason why SOME people think that the WHOLE DATABASE is "crap". "We will not accept researched informaiton from WIKIPEDIA..." BLAH BLAH BLAH.

    I use Wikipedia EVERY FREAKING DAY because I enjoy learning about ... well ... EVERYTHING. Is it always the most comprehensive and accurate?...not always. The items in contention...are POSTED as having you kind of know where the IDIOTS have been doing stupid things.

  • 1 month ago

    This is great source of information, But now it modified by others, so it become little bit fishy. 

    Attachment image
  • 9 months ago

    Not really. Wikipedia is filled with a bunch of fake info now.

  • Anonymous
    9 months ago

    Sometimes it’s not completely true.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 9 months ago

    No because everyone can edit it and will be base on their knowledge and not on facts that are proven.

    • 0rion
      Lv 4
      9 months agoReport

      Incorrect. Anyone can be a contributor to wiki, but you cant just edit stuff on your own. An admin has to review and certify any changes before it hits the system. These admins are volunteers who have specialized experience in that field relative to the post.

  • 9 months ago

    It shouldn't be your only source of information, but it is generally rather reliable. You should cross-reference information.

  • Pearl
    Lv 7
    9 months ago

    i think it is or it wouldnt be there

  • 9 months ago

    Are leak examination questions a valid source of information?

  • 9 months ago

    It's extremely valuable as a starting point for research. But it isn't worth much as the only source of information.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.