Wikipedia's information is not necessarily complete, fully accurate and comprehensive

CITNA (Communication and Information Technology News Agency)- According to SHAFAQNA (Shia International News Association), Wikipedia can be a useful source of religious information. How-ever, it cannot be considered as an unchallengeable source particularly in the fields that need highly accurate information. Wiki's religious information is not necessarily complete, fully accurate and comprehensive.

In an interview with a social media expert, Dr. A. Fateh, he added that Wiki "aimed to provide readers with a neutral point of view and “everything is cited, to maintain the highest standards of reliability” (Wikinews 2010). Meanwhile, despite Wiki principles, there are studies that claim ‘important biases’ in Wikipedia content as the website ultimately reflects its users’ viewpoints (Royal & Kapila 2008).

This social media expert indicated, "therefore, according to data outlined above, if you ask me whether Wikipedia is a reliable source in the field of religion?, I would say readers need more consistent and reliable information in this field (religion). Wikipedia is not advised to be used as a substitute for original religious sources; in the same way academic experts do not take Wiki as their first and main sources of information for academic products as well”.

In other words, I think “Wikipedia can be employed as a useful source of general religious information. However, it cannot be considered as an unchallengeable source; Wiki's religious information is not necessarily complete, fully accurate and comprehensive. Every one should be aware that Wiki's data is constantly edited and corrected  through brain-storming and its content ultimately reflects its contributors too”. Interestingly, even editors on Wikipedia have not assessed Wiki as a reliable source; "Wikis includingWikipedia and other wikis sponsored by the Wiki Foundation, are not regarded as reliable sources. However, wikis are excellent places to locate primary and secondary sources", see here.

Shafaqna: There are some useful articles considering reliability of Wikipedia in following links as follows:

Reliability of Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources

Wikipedia:Academic use

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Academic_use

Wikipedia survives research test

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4530930.stm

Wikipedia: “Wikipedia is not a reliable source

http://beyond-school.org/2010/01/03/wikipedia-wikipedia-is-not-a-reliable-source

google

yahoo

. . .