Wikipedia

All articles are very well written and informative. Very useful for general knowledge about almost anything you can think of. I love this site! Its just so simple to use.

Wikipedia is contending for the number one source of online information. Given that it can practically be edited by anyone, caution should be exercised when use is official or formal in purpose.

Hi, I've previously written a less then positive review of Wikipedia, but have come to be much more fond of it over the past couple of months. I still think that when it comes to participating in Wikipedia from the side of editing pages and participating in there community they can be often unfriendly (not always of course). But I have realized that Wikipedia is quite impressive. I think they have done a good job with what resources they have and that opinion of mine goes especially for the top administration. Wikipedia does provide in fact very accurate information for most of there articles. They don't hire famous professionals in there fields like other encyclopedias, which I would say are a tad more accurate, but Wikipedia provides tremendously more information about any given topic then the usual encyclopedia. They've put trust in people and barred people from doing 'whatever thing' sparingly, and they have managed to allow people to produce a high quality COMPREHENSIVE, (which is unusual) encyclopedia. I visit it often for researching small and large things often. Is it a perfect fact book? No, most of there pages contain at least a few errors within them, and my experience has been that it is hard to edit them quickly, but they are usually tiny issues. They have provided a, for the majority, highly accurate and largely comprehensive encyclopedia that helps with my research especially often. Everything for the most part, is, properly written. Maybe people are relying on it much more often then they should, but it is very helpful when properly used, thanks for this resource, Wikipedia!

Wikipedia has brought information just one click away. In my spare time I browse wikipedia to gain knowledge about different things. Its like a one stop shop.

A well known encyclopedia that has all the info you may need within your studies or just to know more (shame wiki is not the good source to enter into the study papers).

It is user-created and un-scholarly, any article on anything controversial is typically either biased or incomprehensible because sentences contradict each other, or are otherwise so watered down that it is not worth the effort. "Just checking for a simple facts" is not an excuse to use Wikipedia, there is no way to confirm with all the edits whether the content is genuine or has been skewered over time by biased users.

Wikipedia is a catastrophe for public knowledge precisely because it allows anyone to pretend to be an expert on a topic, when they likely are not and the person is unknown and their motives are not known. Wikipedia sounds great for an idea, but expertise is required for controversial topics.

All you have to do now is go to Google Scholar to find scholarly work, the popularity of Wikipedia these days can only be ascribed to the dominance of Wikipedia on the internet as a first search result and laziness or lack of awareness by people to find professional, scholarly books that are accessible via sites like Google Scholar.

I recently by mistake tap on edit option of wikipedia while scrolling screen the pop up message displays say ( You have been blocked from editing wikipedia) SHOCKED I never ever have tried in my life and why will I edit that this is something which I have no concern I rarely use wikipedia. Can anyone tell me how can I block wikipedia in google search.

Came here to say thanks to these guys for this awesome free service. It helped me a lot throughout my studies and also in just some casual situations - you can find any info here, just ANY!

If you go on to Wikipedia and spend a few hours or days viewing conservative people/events of note and liberal/democratic events of note there is a pretty disturbing bias on the way the information is presented to the reader and also the ability of the general public to revise or add to that information. For example a liberal supported Wikipedia reading will almost always allow you to edit but if that edit does not align with the opinion or view the the Wikipedia hierarchy you will end up in an EDIT WAR within minutes and then get suspended without ever being allowed to have a conversation about why your edit or addition is indeed factual. If you want to edit or add to a conservative person or event page those are almost always locked for editing with the excuse that they are trying to prevent vandalism or edit wars. It's really bad for anything related to politics or culturally sensitive matters.

For other topics of interest where subjective bias is not applicable it is okay but the bias regarding politics leaves me questioning the validity of anything related to history of countries and people of note as as well.

I love Wikipedia! It is definitely the most useful site of all times! I use it every day both at work and home. And they have info about absolutely everything I need to know!

It is said that the universe is expanding at 150,000 mph. I'm not sure if even God knows. But on Earth, as we witness the miracle of the technology revolution, none of us can be masters of our universe and that's where Wikipedia plays an invaluable role. This online encyclopedia is in itself an expanding universe of almost anything you need to know and the "go to" place for everyone. It's so amazing that your knowledge about anything will expand faster than what would have been possible without it. If you're a parent with young children, this site must be bookmarked. In fact, if you're still alive, this should be bookmarked.

The nice thing about Wikipedia is that it is neutral, can be edited by anyone, tends to be highly accurate since changes to content undergo the scrutiny of contributing editors, and is an ongoing self-sustaining body of thought. It is also a major contributing website used in the current versions of AI (Chat gpt 4) You've probably noticed that internet searches are now more meaningful. It's rich in inter-wiki hyperlinks which will enhance your original search by providing links to all types of relevant info. Your destination starts in one place and depending upon how curious you are, takes you to places you didn't intend to go or knew existed.

So, while most people think in terms of the present, Wikipedia provides you with enough information to think way beyond the beyond and envision what the future beholds. Check it out. Just add the magic word "wiki" to your internet search query, and enter this phenomenal website.

Wikipedia would be thrown out of court for heresay. As a human in my mid 40's, I've been a living witness to some of the information posted there. Everything from broadcast airdates to scientific information is bastardized here. Sure, they try, but isn't Wikipedia *really* a reductive version of *THE WHOLE ENTIRE INTERNET*?! Using Wikipedia as a reliable source is as ridiculous as asking the guy on the bus sitting next to you. Good luck with that. If you want to get away from *lazy journalism/research*, you have to stay away from Wikipedia and scrub the 'net yourself.

Wikipedia is a wonderful concept and potentially great site. Problem is, for years, racist, sexist, administrators have blocked various IP addresses and accounts I used to correct their racism, and erroneously on-sided, biased articles regarding sexism, Vietnam War, Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, etc. Wikipedia or another organization (possibly an NGO, etc) should do more to end bullying by some of the wikipedia Admins/editors and to also ensure that articles don't spread racism and ignorance at the expense of females, Africans, Indians, and non-Europeans.

Wikipedia is one of the natural wonders of the internet. A totally free resource to learn and get data about pretty much anything. It should be bookmarked by everyone.

Love it! Always enjoyed the simplicity, and it's an online encyclopedia so I don't need to buy a whole set of books. It's possibly one of the most amazing sites on the Internet.

The Wikipedia article about the above Dr John Campbell is total lies. Dr. Campbell tells it as it is and the Americans who run Wikipedia do not like the fact that he tells the truth. To think I actually donated to Wikedpia something I will NEVER do again.

I started using Wikipedia some years ago to get more clarity on things like herbs and medications. I then started using it for some political info. That means like a source to START and better my research. Let's face it sometimes Wikipedia is entertaining too! I happened upon an article that gave me chills. After racking my mind with the info I went back to Wikipedia to see if there was any proof of the claims. The claim was that there is a certain group that has basically pirated Wikipedia by hiring writers to slant info towards their religious and political agenda. I read several queries and I came away bothered. Bothered because the info is indeed slanted and provides more emotional input than FAIR facts. These are not some children who play on the internet they have been taught how to convey their one sided political messages in attempt to keep favor. I will not say who these people are but I challenge you to guess. You can not have facts that leave your group pristine and without complicity. Sooooo no! I use Wikipedia for info that dies not attempt political swaying, or mind control!

You can try to pull the "but it could have been written by a 3 year old" card out for this site but it wouldn't be realistic. Wikipedia is well moderated and there's something to be said for the fact that it appears in the top ten of nearly every internet search.

In fact, I think wikipedia is probably MORE accurate than other "encyclopedias" because of HOW it is moderated.

Either way, if you've been browsing the internet for more than 10 minutes you probably already know (and have used) wikipedia. You don't need yet another review telling you that it's a good thing. You already know.

REASONS TO USE:
[1] Well moderated
[2] Amazingly diverse information library
[3] Relevant to almost every search for information

REASON TO LOSE:
[1] None.

I have recently looked up several different topics. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is not a factual, reliable source. This is why schools will not allow students to use wikipedia.

Always enjoyed the simplicity, and it's an online encyclopedia so I don't need to buy a whole set of books. It's possibly one of the most amazing sites on the Internet.

I had to get one star off, as the professors on my college didn't approve some of my papers where I cited Wiki as a secondary source.
Otherwise, ver, VERY informative site!

Wikipedia is one of those sites where you never know what might come up. If I could, I would have clicked 'I think this website is ON for ages?'. It really depends on what you search.

In my life used to use information that Wikipedia provide to us because it is helpful in my daily life i wish all people should understand why we need to get truly information about this website