Credibility of Wikipedia

Kristin Jerzycke

Second Reaction Paper

September 24, 2008

“According to the Institute of medicine of the National Academy of Sciences and others, the United States is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not provide universal health care." This is an interesting quote; however, since it came from Wikipedia, can readers be certain it is true? At first glance, this statement seems professional, logical, and from what I know about universal healthcare, true. Unfortunately as ‘good’ as something may sound on Wikipedia, there is always a chance that its information is erroneous. When searching scholarly journals or newspapers, many readers assume the information provided is true. However, many of us do not stop to check if these facts are proven or correct. So how do we find credible sources? A way to determine whether the texts are true, we may compare different sources.

I have recently searched many scholarly journals and newspapers online to gain information about a national healthcare system. Because the debate about national healthcare is a big issue in the upcoming election, there are currently many biased articles on the web. I came up with three questions concerning national healthcare, then searched to see what I could find, and see how different journals gave me different answers. My first question was simple: how many Americans are uninsured? I was pleased to discover that multiple journalists estimated that there were 47 million uninsured Americans out of our 300 million+ population. I think it is safe to assume this estimation is correct because it supposedly comes from ‘credible journalists.’

My second question was who is in favor is universal health care? Obviously, the Democratic Party favors it. However, it was hard to draw a conclusion as to how other parties viewed it. According to The New York Times, Massachusetts currently has the lowest rate of uninsured residents in the nation. This is because the state has successfully provided citizens with health insurance.

Last, I asked if universal health care would be successful in America. I first read on Wikipedia that America was the only industrialized nation without universal health care. So I did more research using the scholarly journals and newspapers to find that this is true. The following countries are currently under a universal health care system: virtually all of Europe, United Kingdom, Canada, Thailand and many more. If universal health care is currently successful in other countries, who is to say that it will not work in America?

Finding credible sources actually takes a lot of time. It would be nice to be able to pull any article off Google and be assured that its information is valid. It isn’t that simple. However, it was very simple to create an account with Wikipedia, and enter information into any page about any topic. Contributors do not have to sign their name or site their information. For example, I added “National health care provides citizens with nametags to wear daily.” To many readers, this statement is obviously false. I tracked how long it took for a Wikipedia expert to remove my statement. I posted during Monday’s class, around 4:00 pm. When I checked at 8:30 pm, it was still visible. At 9:00 am Tuesday morning, it had been removed. This just reinforced my previous assumption that Wikipedia is not a credible source because anyone can change the information, as well as add their own.

In conclusion, when researching any topic it is ok to start with Wikipedia to receive the basic idea. However, researchers shouldn’t blindly believe anything posted on Wikipedia is valid until they prove that the statement is valid through additional resources.