Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia and its articles provide a huge amount of information, but it is important to be aware that:
Wikipedia itself states: “Wikipedia is not considered to be a reliable source as not everything in Wikipedia is accurate, comprehensive, or unbiased.” See Researching with Wikipedia for more information.
Information from Wikipedia can be useful if used thoughtfully and appropriately. Wikipedia articles are particularly useful to:
Wikipedia has special policies and organizational methods that can be used to help you evaluate its articles. Follow the specific suggested steps below to evaluate Wikipedia articles.
Look for template messages or featured article status
Users can place messages on an article indicating problems with citations, style, Wikipedia policies (e.g. "Neutral Point of View", "Verifiability" and more). For examples of different messages, see Wikipedia's Template Index. In addition, articles can receive a status of "featured article” (look for a star on the top right side), which indicates they have met certain Wikipedia standards of excellence.
Does the article have citations for its assertions and facts?
Pay attention to the hyperlinked footnotes throughout the article. Are important assertions being cited and what are those sources? If sources are available, check to see if they are being cited properly. Some sources will be considered more authoritative than other sources, but the type of sources chosen, as well as the quantity available, will depend upon the article. A topic from popular culture, like the role-playing game Elden Ring, would have very different sources than an article on an academic topic, such as a U.S. President.
Check the edit history of the article
Every article in Wikipedia has an edit history. Look for the tab labeled “View history” at the top of the article. The quantity of edits over a period of time will be an indication of how much effort has been put into constructing the article. Likewise, you can choose to look at the article from any point of view in its edit history and view a note about what changes were made. This can be a good way to determine whether an article may have vandalized before you decided to use it.
Check out the User’s page
Because all Wikipedia authors are anonymous, it can be difficult if not impossible to evaluate an author’s bias or experience. The edit history provides a username for each edit to an article, or an IP address if the user did not create an account. Click the username to view the user’s page, which lists that user’s contributions as well as personal information about them. Keep in mind you can’t always trust virtual identities. If only an IP address is provided, note that with IP sniffing some addresses can be traced back to their owning organization. So edits done anonymously within Microsoft, the CIA, etc. do tell us something about the contributor.
When viewing the edit history of an article, look for a diversity of contributors
Most articles will benefit from a diversity of contributors. In general, there are many different ways to approach a subject. Information gathered from multiple sources is usually more well-rounded and informed. Think of a research paper that had two sources rather than other one with 20. Which paper do you think would be more balanced?
Read the Talk page
Click on the “Talk” tab at the top of the page to read a discussion about possible additions and improvements to the article as well as any challenges and ongoing debates among its contributors.
The counterpart of Wikipedia as a popular source is Scholarpedia, which is a free online encyclopedia reviewed and maintained by scholarly experts in mathematics and sciences from around the world. Scholarpedia is inspired by Wikipedia and aims to complement it by providing in-depth scholarly treatment of topics within the fields of mathematics and sciences including physical, biological, behavioral, and social sciences.