Search results
People also ask
Is Wikipedia a reliable source?
Do Wikipedia articles need reliable sources?
What is a reliable source?
What is Wikipedia's policy on reliable sources?
Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published sources, making sure that all majority and significant minority views that have appeared in those sources are covered (see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view). If no reliable sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it.
Reliable sources are those with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. They tend to have an editorial process with multiple people scrutinizing work before it is published. Academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources.
What is a reliable source? Sources used in Wikipedia should have been published. Some published documents are written by just one person, and nobody else checks it before it is published. It is easy for these sources to contain mistakes or untrue information.
Research studies have shown that Wikipedia is roughly as reliable as other sources commonly accepted as “accurate.” Arguably, the one to demonstrate this first was science journalist Jim Giles, who wrote a 2005 Nature article, “ Internet encyclopaedias go head to head .”
Wikipedia should not cite itself, but circular referencing and fact-laundering are possibilities if we are unaware that sources we use copy from Wikipedia. Lists are at Wikipedia:Republishers and WP:MIRRORS. Some examples that appear in Google Books and are frequently inadvertently used by editors are:
