SmallBiz
But, how accurate is the information? After all, the Wikipedia website states that "Information is sometimes unconfirmed and questionable, lacking proper sources that could legitimize articles."
To find out how wikipedia is being used, I asked small business owners. Responses covered a broad range. Below are some excerpts highlighting the responses received.
The Negatives:
"I don’t use Wikipedia. I think it is of questionable value."
"I use wiki as an alternative source ... and rely only on protected pages. Unprotected pages are anyone’s toy in the Wikipedia sandbox."
"Unlike any other cited reference, Wikipedia may change by the time someone goes back to look at it. Note, the issue is NOT so much that the information may be wrong (even horrifically wrong) – this may be the case with any reference – but that the cited source may be unreproducable."
The Positives:
"The formal encyclopedia is typically the work of a single author in any particular area and is often subject to the bias of that author. With Wikipedia, you effectively get worldwide review."
"When I run a Google search on a topic, I’ll often go first to the Wikipedia sites that show on the Google search. The Wikipedia articles in my field seem quite accurate."
"I used it for statistics on population ... this info was cited as coming from the US Census and subsequent follow up surveys done by the census board."
"I use Wikipedia primarily to understand technology concepts to help compress my learning curve. I appreciate the hyperlinked content in a Wikipedia entry that often leads to related concepts, providing an even deeper understanding..."
The Cautious:
"I would never rely on it as fact without confirming the information with at least one other, more reliable source. I would prefer to see the information confirmed by at least TWO other respected sources."
"In areas of ‘pure’ science, information is easily verified by that review process; e.g., the number of electrons around an atom is well known. Mistakes of that sort are found quickly and corrected. In other areas such as world history, the combined opinions of multiple authors as to what happened and/or the reasons that certain events occurred are much more valuable than the opinions and limited scope of a single author."
"In general, I find that Wikipedia tends to include all popular, and often some ‘not so popular’ and less conventional, thoughts on various subjects. The result is that the reader has a chance to review the possibilities and determine for themselves which theories and collections they find most believable."
In Conclusion:
It’s clear that Wikipedia is a huge and productive resource - when used effectively. While there are risks in using the information, those risks can be reduced by checking the sources and getting a second source. The upside is that you get the benefit of the input from knowledgeable authors from throughout the world.
Jean D. Sifleet, is an attorney, CPA, 3-time entrepreneur and author. Her publications include: "Advantage IP - Profit from Your Great Ideas" (Infinity 2005) and "Beyond 401(k)s for Small Business Owners" (Wiley 2004). As a member of Hassett & Donnelly’s business practice group, Jean focuses on counseling privately held companies on a broad range of business matters including leveraging intellectual property and successfully implementing ownership transitions.
WBJ Web Partners
Most Recent
Most Recent
0 Comments