> Journalists and academics can’t use it as a reference. Nor can students, though they can use Britannica. Lots of journalists do use it. That is why there is

> Journalists and academics can’t use it as a reference. Nor can students, though they can use Britannica. Lots of journalists do use it. That is why there is a bunch of BBC articles claiming that the electric toaster was invented by a Scot called "Alan MacMasters" ... they used Wikipedia without checking its information. It was completely made up: https://wikipediocracy.com/2022/08/11/wikipedias-credibility-is-toast/ https://wikipediocracy.com/2022/08/11/wikipedias-credibility... A book published by Cambridge University Press says that coatis are also called "Brazilian aardvarks" – because the writer copied from Wikipedia. Completely made up. https://www.theregister.com/2017/01/16/wikipedia_16_birthday_fails/ https://www.theregister.com/2017/01/16/wikipedia_16_birthday... Wikipedia simply has different flaws than older reference works, and it's important to be aware of them. Another thing not to trust blindly is the Wikipedia fundraising banners. In 2015, the Washington Post published a piece titled, "Wikipedia has a ton of money. So why is it begging you to donate yours?" https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12/02/wikipedia-has-a-ton-of-money-so-why-is-it-begging-you-to-donate-yours/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12... In that piece, the Washington Post reported that the Wikimedia Foundation had "net assets in excess of $77 million". Today, the Foundation's assets (including its $115 million endowment with the Tides Foundation) stand at around five times as much: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/1/1e/Wikimedia_Foundation_FY2020-2021_Audit_Report.pdf#page=5 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/1/1e/Wikim... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2022-06-26/Special_report https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2... Yet the fundraising banners and emails sound as desperate and guilt-tripping as ever. "Donate to keep Wikipedia online ...", "Donate to protect Wikipedia's independence ..." Many Wikipedians are disgusted with that: https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/thread/YKYDOBBH2RHJO2DHNP4YEPH37J3L5PBH/ https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@list... Seriously, I love Wikipedia. I have been contributing to it for more than fifteen years. But I would say most volunteers who contribute to Wikipedia would NEVER advise anyone – say, a family member who is starting out as a doctor or journalist – to trust anything said in Wikipedia blindly. They'd ALWAYS tell you to check the references, and in a case of "Who invented X" to seek corroboration in a 20th-century source.