Критиките за користење на „Wikipedia“ во образовниот процес и во научните текстови постојат од кога постои и самата Википедиа. Дури и на самите технички уредници им здосади(ло), па ги присобраа на едно место на самата онлајн енциклопедија:
Wikipedia acknowledges that it should not be used as a primary source for serious research. Librarian Philip Bradley stated in an October 2004 interview with The Guardian that the concept behind the site was a “lovely idea,” and he would use it in practice, and that he is “not aware of a single librarian who wouldn’t. The main problem is the lack of authority. With printed publications, the publishers have to ensure that their data is reliable, as their livelihood depends on it. But with something like this, all that goes out the window…“The user who visits Wikipedia to learn about some subject, to confirm some matter of fact, is rather in the position of a visitor to a public restroom. It may be obviously dirty, so that he knows to exercise great care, or it may seem fairly clean, so that he may be lulled into a false sense of security. What he certainly does not know is who has used the facilities before him.
„Слабите точки„ на Википедиа се добро издокументирани и главно се поделени на следниве ниовоа:
- 1.1 The Wiki model
- 1.2 Usefulness as a reference
- 1.3 Wall Street Journal debate
- 1.4 Suitability as an encyclopedia
- 1.5 Anti-elitism as a weakness
- 1.6 Systemic bias in coverage
- 1.7 Neutral point of view
- 1.8 Difficulty of fact-checking
- 1.9 Use of dubious sources
- 1.10 Exposure to vandals
- 1.11 Exposure to political operatives and advocates
- 1.12 Prediction of failure
- 1.13 Privacy concerns
- 1.14 Quality concerns
- 1.15 Threat to traditional publishers
- 1.16 “Waffling” prose, “antiquarianism” and quality of writing
- 1.17 Anonymous editing
- 1.18 Copyright issues
- 1.19 The “hive mind”
Последниот напад стигна од Шкотска каде наставничкиот кадар обвини директно дека лошите оценки на учениците се резултат на слепо користење на информациите од Википедиа, кои згора на тоа содржат многу непрецизности:
The Scottish Parent Teacher Council (SPTC) said pupils are turning to websites and internet resources that contain inaccurate or deliberately misleading information before passing it off as their own work. The group singled out online encyclopedi a Wikipedia, which allows entries to be logged or updated by anyone and is not verified by researchers, as the main source of information. Standard Grade pass rates were down for the first time in four years last year and the SPTC is now calling for pupils to be given lessons on using the internet appropriately for additional research purposes “before the problem gets out of hand” (news.scotsman.com).
Од личнo искуство знам дека нашата студентско-ученика класа en masse флерта со Вики, и можам да додадам дека за работи од сфера на популарна култура, тривија, и слично, податоците лесно се наоѓаат и се корисни, но за историски податоци, поделикатнии егзактни научни информации, човек требада ги прифаќа само информативно и со солидна доза на критичка свест. На некои умни им текнало да ја тестираат егзактноста на Википедиа, така што ставале грешни информации на неа и чекале да видат колку време ќе останат на неа:
