Skip to main content

Is Wikipedia an Authentic Source of Information? Twitter Followers Talk

Do you know that Wikipedia can be edited by anyone from anywhere in the world, even without a registered user account? In this context, there has always been disputes as to the authenticity of the content.

Yesterday, Ms Laurel Shah and I (@vjlenin) posted our Twitter followers a query:

Do you believe Wikipedia is an authentic source of information?

The @replies have been quick and enlightening. They are posted here. Make sure you follow interesting Twitter accounts here.

@Ncub8: I believe that as a whole, Wikipedia is fairly accurate by virtue of massive crowdsourcing. It shouldn't be used academically.

@LizS4ra: oh heavens no, it's editable by any loon.

@RawrStar: It's not considered a viable source of information in exams, and it's often inaccurate. I'd say no.

@Adenhepburn: Tough Q, I've changed my answer 5 times in my head already so I'll throw something crazy out there with NO thinking to justify!

@Ulumarketing: It really depends. If it is for work - absolutely not. Curiosity - sure. The depth of attributions at the bottom help me know.

@Maybenextyear: sometimes trust footnoted material.

@Ahdchild: Wikipedia is a great place to get info but you should verify what you learn there. The same is true for most sources of info.

@Usedcargenius: I see Wikis as a great starting place. They're good for letting you know how much you don't know—not for definitive answers.

@Maxi8: No. People can add any data they want to Wikipedia.

@Cindybidar: Wikipedia is a good place to find primary sources, but not generally a primary source itself.

@Shinydesigns: Like any other information source, it should be used with careful consideration. I've found, and independently verified useful facts.

@Bardfilm: "Authentic" isn't "authoritative". Wikipedia can be both—but, for most audiences, other sources are preferable in the extreme.

@Tweetbook1: No, I don't. Many Japanese don't believe all the articles on Wiki, because we knew some political persons wrote negative about Japan.

@Littletechgirl: I'm torn on Wikipedia. Some info is great, but the fact that ANYONE can edit is the downside to me. I have seen pages hacked and false info on there several times. But, if they police it well and make sure that only good relevant info gets posted, then it's great. I even have an app for it on my iPhone. (Three continuous tweets)

@Othella: Wikipedia contains too many subjective contents, some important pieces of information are not included, mostly those related to society.

@Dimitri_from_ro: Yes it is authentic. I did edit Wikipedia myself and I can tell you that the information I wrote was very well documented.

@Cfine: Wikipedia is a credible source of information as it is policed by the public. Fakes and falsities are often caught early.

@TchrEric: Too easily manipulated and "modified"; would not accept it as credible source in research or scholarly work; starting point, maybe.

@Frank_einstien: Wikipedia is a good place to understand a topic and get links to the most relevant resources.


Most of the people who answered this query found that Wikipedia is NOT a trustworthy source for information. Anyone without any authority can edit this resource, though it is clearly well policed and is regarded by most as a trustworthy resource. However, errors encroach every now and then.

Most of the articles in Wikipedia have citations (references) at the bottom. These citation links point to reliable sources (perhaps only reliable ones). Therefore, Wikipedia article is a good source for basic information about any subject, and for detailed authentic information, you can follow the citation links.

Readers, more Twitter questions will be posted in the future. Make sure you follow the Twitter accounts you found above. And answer my follower questions to get featured here.

Copyright © Lenin Nair 2008


  1. The citation links on most wikipedia themselves are not always trustworthy sources. Especially some links refering to History and Humanities. So the sum-up is that Wikipedia is not an all true all the time information. There is lot of half truth ,half lies all over the pages.


Post a Comment

Comments are moderated very strictly

Popular posts from this blog

What Is the Difference Between Hardcover and Paperback?

Today, my reader, Rahman contacted me with a doubt:

Dear Lenin, would you explain why there are two types of books: hardcover and paperback?
This is quite a simple affair and there are explanatory articles to be found at various places on the Net. Here is my addition.


A hardcover aka hardback is a book bound with thick protective cover, with usually a paper or leather dust jacket over the main cover. The aim of hardcover is protection and durability. These books are mainly for long-term use and collectors’ editions. Hardcover books last far longer than the corresponding paperbacks. They do not get damaged easily thus making them perfect for reference guides, great literary works, etc.

In addition, there is a difference in the type of paper used to print hardcover books. The paper used is long-lasting acid-free type. Acid-free paper has a pH value of 7 (neutral) which makes it highly durable. The papers are stitched and glued to the spine.

Hardbacks are prepared for commercial …

En Dash, Em Dash, and Hyphen

We have three types of dashes in use: The hyphen, En Dash, and the Em Dash. In this post, we will see how to use them all correctly.

Hyphen (-)

The hyphen is the minus key in Windows-based keyboards. This is a widely used punctuation mark. Hyphen should not be mistaken for a dash. Dash is different and has different function than a hyphen.

A hyphen is used to separate the words in a compound adjective, verb, or adverb. For instance:

The T-rex has a movement-based vision.
My blog is blogger-powered.
John’s idea was pooh-poohed.

The hyphen can be used generally for all kinds of wordbreaks.

En Dash (–)

En Dash gets its name from its length. It is one ‘N’ long (En is a typographical unit that is almost as wide as 'N'). En Dash is used to express a range of values or a distance:

People of age 55–80 are more prone to hypertension.
Delhi–Sidney flight was late by three hours.

In MS Word, you can put an En Dash either from the menu, clicking Insert->Symbol or by the key-combination, Ctrl + Num…

What Is the Meaning of the Word 'Ghajini'? Story and Trivia of Aamir Khan's New Film [Special]

[Special Entry]

Aamir Khan's latest film is titled a little weirdly for the taste of Hindi filmgoers. 'Ghajini': They have never heard of such a name, and such a word never existed in Hindi or in any other Indian language.

The name Ghajini is the name of the villain of the film. In Tamil version, the name of the villain was Laxman.

As a Tamil moviegoer, I have already watched Ghajini and know the story in full.

So, What Does the Title Mean?

In Tamil, the title of the film is inspired by the story of Mahmud of Ghazni, an ancient invader of India. This person was so persistent in invading India that he continued trying after several failures. In the film too, the protagonist is such persistent in finding out and killing the villain of the film, who had killed his girlfriend, Kalpana (played by Asin). Aamir's Character (named Sanjay Ramaswamy in Tamil), is a short-term amnesiac, who cannot remember anything more than fifteen minutes.

You may ask then how the Ghazni became…