Get the latest Science News and Discoveries

Why many researchers refuse to cite Wikipedia: manuscript examines the systematic rejection of Wikipedia in academic settings, not to argue for its legitimacy as a source, but to demonstrate that its reliability is often underestimated.


Wikipedia, a widely successful encyclopedia recognized in academic circles and used by both students and professors alike, has led educators to question whether it can be cited as an information source, given its widespread use for this very purpose. The dilemma quickly emerged: if Wikipedia has become the go-to information source for so many, why can't it be cited? If consulting and using Wikipedia as a source of information is permitted, why does it become controversial the moment one attempts to cite it? This manuscript examines the systematic rejection of Wikipedia in academic settings, not to argue for its legitimacy as a source, but to demonstrate that its reliability is often underestimated while traditional academic sources enjoy disproportionate credibility, despite their increasingly apparent shortcomings. The central thesis posits that Wikipedia's rejection stems from an outdated epistemological bias that overlooks both the project's verification mechanisms and the structural crises affecting scientific publishing.

None

Get the Android app

Or read this on r/EverythingScience

Read more on:

Photo of Wikipedia

Wikipedia

Photo of Researchers

Researchers

Photo of source

source

Related news:

News photo

University of Houston researchers drive breakthroughs in building longer-lasting, faster-charging batteries - EurekAlert!

News photo

Solar rain mystery cracked by researchers - EurekAlert!

News photo

Researchers at KM3NeT Observatory announce the detection of a neutrino with energy 220 PeV. A possible source of such ultrahigh-energy particles is from a primordial black-hole.