Beyond Wikipedia: Building Credibility Through Fact-Checking and Source Evaluation
Happy 25th birthday to Wikipedia! It’s hard to believe that the free online encyclopedia has been around for a quarter of a century. Wikipedia launched in 2001, and I recall being amazed that so many people contributed articles for free and wondering who edited and fact-checked those articles.
It turns out that fact-checking is not part of Wikipedia’s model. Over the years, warnings have been issued not to rely on the site’s crowdsourced content. Heck, Wikipedia itself says Wikipedia articles are not reliable sources to cite in other Wikipedia articles, pointing out that “[as] a user-generated source, it can be edited by anyone at any time, and any information it contains at a particular time could be vandalism, a work in progress, or simply incorrect.”
Professional fact-checkers have existed for at least 100 years. The first media outlet to check facts prior to publication was Time magazine, which set up its own research department in 1923 to make sure its articles contained correct information. Ensuring accuracy builds the credibility of all types of content creators, including media outlets, businesses and other organizations, but that important task is now all too often left to writers, editors and other content creators.
Fast-forward to the rise of artificial intelligence and AI-prompted online research, which has exponentially increased the need to vet sources of information. AI is now inescapably incorporated into popular search engines such as Google, whose AI Overviews of its search results cite a range of resources, some more reputable than others. Frequently cited sources include Wikipedia, Reddit, Quora and other repositories of crowdsourced information.
For writers and editors, fact-checking has always been about not only conducting thorough research but also judging the credibility of where information comes from. AI-enabled search can make this harder. An AI-generated search result can create a citation doom loop, with articles from questionable secondary sources merely citing each other and no primary source to be found.
Skilled writers rely on credible sources and fact-check their own work before submitting it to their editor. Good editors ask a lot of questions. I feel comfortable saying most of us are driven by the need to get things right as much as by an overall desire to produce high-quality work.
Fact-checking and source evaluation take time and effort. While guidance about verifying information is often aimed at journalists and educators, any content creator and editor can benefit from it. The Harvard Guide to Using Sources, published by the Harvard College Writing Program, includes a comprehensive section on questions to ask, such as:
Who is the author, and what are their credentials?
Who is the author’s audience? Does the author or the organization they work for have a particular viewpoint?
Does the source provide enough detail and background?
Who is the publisher? A newspaper? A peer-reviewed journal? YouTube?
How current is the information being presented? Have there been any updates?
Can this information be found anywhere else?
Whether content is published online or in print, in an article or a social media post, readers should not be questioning whether it’s true. Writers and editors are on the front lines of establishing and maintaining a publisher’s credibility — whether the publisher is a media outlet, an organization or a brand.
Featured Articles
