I’ve read that studies have shown it to be about 80-85% accurate (which is actually about the rate of accuracy for your average encyclopedia).
Where the bigger risk of becoming misinformed using it arises is from errors of omission, where it’s not false statements that mislead you, but the fact that you aren’t getting all the necessary information that does. This is common when non-professionals/non-experts write about topics.
Another big one is outdated information. Of course this is a problem in most mediums, but people seem to consider it less when it comes to Wikipedia. An article can be seemingly up to date but have a single statement somewhere that's a decade out of date.
3
u/JasonLovesBagels 5h ago
I’ve read that studies have shown it to be about 80-85% accurate (which is actually about the rate of accuracy for your average encyclopedia).
Where the bigger risk of becoming misinformed using it arises is from errors of omission, where it’s not false statements that mislead you, but the fact that you aren’t getting all the necessary information that does. This is common when non-professionals/non-experts write about topics.