Wikipedia Quality Content/Control Issues

[eflo]

Earlier this week, I arrived to work before anyone else, so I got some breakfast in the cafeteria and checked my e-mail. At some point, I came across an article about Wikiepdia and the Quality Content/Control issues that were/are popping up on the site. Since I'm unable to locate that article, this thread no longer deserves the place I thought it would have in the News Forum. Oh well.

To the point: I love Wikipedia and the idea of allowing anyone to contribute to the articles. I think it's a great idea to have such an open community. Unfortunately, that also opens up the doors to people that want to deface the site as well. :( Can such a fascinating project survive in the real world for generations? Will the site eventually be locked down?

I frequently look up information on Wikipedia, but I have never come across what I would consider a Quality Control or Quality Content issue. Has anyone else experienced this?

Second, while on the topic on Wikiepdia, why don't I just open this thread up for a discussion on anything Wikipedia. Likes? Dislikes? Spin-off sites?

[oceanflower]

I've never had a problem with content on anything I've looked up on Wikipedia. Before providing a link or using the info from the article I'm reading, however, I make sure I already have enough knowledge of the topic to be able to decide if the Wikipedia article contains valid information. I would not, however, trust Wikipedia for infornation on a subject I knew nothing about.

[apostasy]

wikipedia is a good reference, but far from authoritative. The nature of medium is that anyone can update it, so there are stories of incorrect or even contradictory information being in entries.

I think the story you were looking for is here:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/18/2135219&tid=95

[vierdreieins]

I've never had any issues with it either. It's nice that they make sure there's a little banner that says the content may be wrong (if that article is being disputed), or the author may not have been completely neutral in his/her views. (And even in those articles I couldn't see why they thought it wasn't neutral..) In any case, I've had a long love affair with Wikipedia, and use it as a reference for just about everything, so if it changes I'm not going to be happy.

[musi]

ever since i discovered Wikipedia, i have trusted it completely until i saw a little "edit" button there. :) but really almost all the articles can be controlled by other articles on the net and besides, so far Wikipedia has not let me down, so i will go on trusting it.

[mazarane]

I think it's definitely an impressive resource. However, I have certainly come across some disputed bits- basically areas where opinion is more important than fact, so any source can't really be considered fully authoritative. On something like that, I certainly wouldn't trust just to a wiki article.

I think I tend to use it the opposite way to Liz- I use it to find out the basics of a subject so I know what I want to look up in more detail!