Skip to Main Content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.


Wikipedia and Academic Research

Unlike traditional encyclopedia articles, which are usually professionally written and edited, anyone can edit Wikipedia: experts, amateurs, cranks—and you. This has advantages and disadvantages that need to be kept in mind if you use Wikipedia.

Advantages: Wikipedia's breadth and scope are unequalled, and it is usually very-up-to-date. Articles in many subjects—including technology, the sciences, and pop-culture—are often detailed and accurate. Since any one can change a Wikipedia article factual errors are often quickly corrected--at least in popular articles.  As a result, it can be a useful place to get a quick and current overview of many topics.

Disadvantages: The quality of articles on more obscure and controversial topics varies greatly: these articles can be incomplete or idiosyncratic. In these areas, you are likely to be better off relying on a more traditional encyclopedia whether in-print or online.

In most cases, Wikipedia is not an acceptable source for an academic paper--though the same can be said about traditional encyclopedias.This does not mean that Wikipedia can't play a role in academic research: it can be a useful place to begin, but it is not where you should finish.

Alternatives to Wikipedia

For more specialized resources take a look at an appropriate research guide or ask a librarian.

Further Information