|Author(s)||Peter Denning, Jim Horning, David Parnas, Lauren Weinstein|
|Published in||Commun. ACM|
|Article||BASE, CiteSeerX, Google Scholar|
|Web||Ask, Bing, Google (PDF), Yahoo!|
|Download and mirrors|
|Local copy||Not available|
|Remote mirror(s)||/ http://www.csl.sri.com/users/neumann/insiderisks05.html dx.doi.org|
|Export and share|
|BibTeX, CSV, RDF, JSON|
|Browse properties · List of journal articles|
Several risks related to Wikipedia, a venerable form of knowledge organization and dissemination are presented. Wikipedia does not confirm the accuracy of the information presented by them, and is unable to tell the motives of the contributors to an article. It is difficult to determine how qualified an article's contributors are, the revision histories often identify them by pseudonyms, making it difficult to check credentials and sources. Many articles in the Wikipedia do not cite independent sources. Wikipedia contains no formal peer review process for fact-checking, and the editors themselves might not be well versed in the topics they write about. The Wikipedia cannot attain the status of a true encyclopedia without more formal content-inclusion and expert review procedures.
- This section requires expansion. Please, help!
Cited byThis publication has 8 citations. Only those publications available in WikiPapers are shown here:
- A Brief Review of Studies of Wikipedia in Peer-Reviewed Journals
- Cultural bias in Wikipedia content on famous persons
- Hackers, Cyborgs, and Wikipedians: The Political Economy and Cultural History of Wikipedia
- Reference Blindness: The Influence of References on Trust in Wikipedia
- Scientific citations in Wikipedia
- Secure Wiki System: A plugin-based solution to wiki security
- What We Know About Wikipedia: A Review of the Literature Analyzing the Project(s)
- What’s on Wikipedia and What’s Not... ?