Is WikiPedia really a reliable encyclopedia website for real infomation?

I mean all the articles (or some) on WikiPedia and do some major cleaning, and fix all the propaganda, etc.

But can, Wiki be a reliable source for information?

As a WikiPedian editor, I noticed there's a lot of vandalism in plenty of articles. I'm just there to revert what appears to be vandalism and some grammatical errors.

I really like the website. When I search for any subject, which happens a lot at work, generally Wikipedia is the first search result on the list. It's quick and overall informative.

A lot of good information is found, but you do have to take it with a grain of salt. Information on the site can be altered by anyone in order to allow public contribution. The benefit of this is unlimited access to information as it's known by people throughout the world. While most additions appear to be valid (as though the contributors really appreciate fact over opinion) you'll want to stick to a dictionary or encyclopedia if the information you seek depends on certainty.

I know it's fairly reliable for anything math related, but that's all I use it for.

no. never. any english professor or teacher will tell you that when citing material for research, wikipedia is probably the worst place you can use. alot of information there is pretty good. but there are enough users who can change things. I've found weird changes in actors profiles and casting mistakes in a few movies. Queen Elizabeth's page once read that she had two kids, one named batman and the other robin. wiki is great for some knowledge, but I would never use it as a source for any papers or when sharing information with others.

Yes, Wikipedia is reliable. Although I would never use it as a cited source, the External links sections of the pages are quite good. Also, if you need some background on a topic, I would definitely recommend Wikipedia--the articles are easy to read and often give good summaries at the top. The issue is that Wikipedia is neither a primary nor a secondary source--the articles are written by people who have read the primary sources, so it is a tertiary source, which leaves it open for bias. However, the editorial team does a remarkable job at reverting questionable edits in minutes or even seconds.

One important thing to note is that it is BY FAR more reliable than the internet as a whole.

Studies have been done (at least two serious studies, try googling it if you're interested) that have concluded that, over all, the wikipedia is as accurate as normal encyclopedias. The main thing is to check the references and citings. Also, look to see when the last few edits were. If the page/topic was just recently edited, then it may have some unreliable content - - but if it's been there a while, then it should be ok, as bad info is usually deleted rather quickly.

the truth is no its not very reliable but still most popul searches are monitered well so in the long run not bad

It's a good place to look when you want to gain quick knowldege on a certain topic, though it can't always be trusted 100%.

I find it especailly useful when it comes to looking for info on less known things, that typical people usually won't even bother looking.

It is a starting step but you have to get some info from somewhere else

It is very reliable

Sometimes it can be if you're lucky but you can't always trust what's found there. I know this past year Wiki was blocked at our school because anyone can edit the site and make up whatever they'd like. When I use Wiki for a report I try to find the info. found there on at least one other site to make sure it's true. You never know if what you find there is really a fact because anyone can change it.