What is the competition for wikipedia?

how reliable is wikipedia?

Wikipedia doesn't have any true 'Competition'. They are a non profit organization that allows users to add their knowledge to a massive database. They don't sell ad space and don't even allow entries which can be construed as an advertisement.

Wikipedia is very reliable. There are some erroneous postings, however for the most part, it's a vast wealth of knowledge. When in doubt, follow the links provided on the bottom of each page, which are sited as sources.

not rly...because ppl just change the info sumtimes

Google is testing an Internet site for sharing knowledge that would compete with Wikipedia. Google's project is named "knol".

As for reliability, like anything on the Internet you should question what you read -- review multiple sources. Many schools have stopped allowing students to use Wikipedia.

Google.

It is very reliable, and you can almost always get the correct information, unbiased, and from a neutral point of view. However, this is not always the case. If the article you are reading seems new, incomplete, or otherwise untrustworthy, then don't use that page. However, About 90% of WikiPedia's articles have been edited by people around the globe, each of them adding new information or improving the quality of the article. This ensures high quality articles for users to read for free.

You may have heard that WikiPedia's articles are "edited by anyone, and thus can lead to horrible, fictitious writings". This may happen to about less than 5% of WikiPedia's articles daily, but there are millions of people viewing the articles as well. They tend to discard the changes revert back to a previous version, one that hasn't been horribly dismembered. You can always click on the History tab and view previous versions if you're still unsure.


So your best bet at quality, concise content is WikiPedia.

It's Quite reliable for me. I can even found an author of a not so famous book. But there is some thing that you can't relay on wikipedia. It's content are provided by people that may be not a professional. Almost everyone can write anything in wikipedia. You might not know which article is written by a professional and which article that written by a complete idiot who claim him self smart people. You might need to compare the article with other encyclopedias just to make sure. But for the content I think wikipedia is the most complete encyclopedia both online or not.
By the Way my friend told me there are other encyclopedia online that might be wikipedia competitor it called Knol and it's a Google product. You should check it out.

Google is an alternative but search is difficult.
I myself find wikipedia to be informative but only 50% accurate

SOMETHIN' CALLED BULBAPEDIA AND KNOL(GOOGLE)

RELIABILITY: I USE IT TO CHECK OUT ALOT OF THINGS

Its totally a mixed reaction cause on wikipedia we can edit the information and the positive side is that wikipedia provides great information

Wikipedia is unreliable

I would say the competition for Wikipedia would probably be the Google or Yahoo! search engines, because they are a bit more reliable than Wikipedia. Wikipedia wouldn't neccessarily be the most reliable search tool, because anyone can become a member and change any information in the Wikipedia system, including false information. So, I wouldn't trust Wikipedia for important things, such as school projects and work information.