Still think Wikipedia is a valid source of information? Think again!

As evidenced recently by social media outlets, Wikipedia continues to be a mixture of truth and lies when it comes to the information it reports. Wikipedia, by definition, is a free “encyclopedia” that anyone, yes anyone, can edit.

The most recent case stems from Stephen Colbert during a segment of his “Colbert Report.” Colbert was discussing the fact that Wikipedia could predict who Mitt Romney’s running mate (VP) was going to be.

International Business Times had reported that, “shortly before McCain’s decision was announced, Palin’s Wikipedia page was updated 68 times.” This fueled Colbert to test a theory of his own. Colbert urged his viewers to update the Wikipedia pages of their top choice of running mate for Romney.

According to Politico, those updates consisted of, but were not limited to Rob Portman, Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal, Chris Christie, David Petraeus and Tim Pawlenty; who Colbert edited on air. These sites are now locked down from edits.

The next time you read that the person you are researching is the 1977 thumb war champion, take it to the Globe Education Network online library and do some actual research on the validity of such claims.

The full article from Huffington Post can be found here.

http://www.globeuniversity.edu/

http://www.globeuniversity.edu/





This entry was posted in Newsletter, Online and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Still think Wikipedia is a valid source of information? Think again!

  1. Alyssa says:

    If you’re looking for a credible alternative to Wikipedia – check out the CREDO Reference database in the Online Library. CREDO has loads of information on just about any topic under the sun – and it’s all from trustworthy sources! http://www.globeeducationnetwork.com/library/resources/articles/credo-reference/

  2. This is the first that I have heard of this and I am disappointed to hear it!

Comments are closed.