Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The false information lasted for six years and was propagated by hundreds of websites, several newspapers, and even a few books published by university presses. [1] [2] The reliability of Wikipedia and its volunteer-driven and community-regulated editing model, particularly its English-language edition, has been questioned and tested.
A website with ties to Turkish government-related organizations that denies the historical facts of the Armenian genocide. [83] [84] Fact-Checking Turkey factcheckingturkey.com Operated by PR company Bosphorus Global and counters criticism of Turkey in foreign media. It treats statements by Turkish government officials as arbiters of the truth.
Fake news website that has published claims about the pilot of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 reappearing, a billionaire wanting to recruit 1,000 women to bear his children, and an Adam Sandler death hoax. [173] [174] [175] LiveMonitor livemonitor.co.za Fake news website in South Africa, per Africa Check, an IFCN signatory. [133] lockerdome.com
Wikipedia's credibility has improved during its lifetime. Wikipedia allows anyone to edit its contents and this can undermine its credibility. An illustrious professor could post content and a "troll" or uninformed individual could easily overwrite it, with or without a malicious agenda. Wikipedia addresses this concern with internal ...
Wikipedia has a reputation for cultivating a culture of fact-checking among its editors. [16] Wikipedia's fact-checking process depends on the activity of its volunteer community of contributors, who numbered 200,000 as of 2018. [1] The development of fact-checking practices is ongoing in the Wikipedia editing community. [6]
These may cite an article, guideline, discussion, statistic, or other content from Wikipedia (or a sister project) to support a statement about Wikipedia. Wikipedia or the sister project is a primary source in this case and may be used following the policy for primary sources .
However, although Wikipedia articles are tertiary sources, Wikipedia employs no systematic mechanism for fact-checking or accuracy. Thus, Wikipedia articles (and Wikipedia mirrors) in themselves are not reliable sources for any purpose (except as sources on themselves per WP:SELFSOURCE). Primary sources are often difficult to use appropriately.
The following presents a non-exhaustive list of sources whose reliability and use on Wikipedia are frequently discussed. This list summarizes prior consensus and consolidates links to the most in-depth and recent discussions from the reliable sources noticeboard and elsewhere on Wikipedia.