Developed in part with a grant from
the National Science Foundation
Review of Wikipedia

Wikipedia reviews

112 reviews
149 New Montgomery Street, Floor 6
San Francisco, CA 94105
Tel: 3286542401
privacy@wikimedia.org

112 Reviews From Our Community

Service
8
Value
9
Shipping
2
Returns
2
Quality
10

All Reviews

rahjeeb
8 reviews
47 helpful votes
6/29/17

Wikipedia is basically an online encyclopedia. It haves numerous articles of information on just about everything. Even though there are a few mistakes in some of the articles and sometimes the information isn't always accurate, I believe this website deserves a 5 star rating, because Wikipedia normally knows what they're talking about. Wikipedia is a great, well known place to find out what you need to know.

Advertisement
anam139
2 reviews
0 helpful votes
5/7/17

You guys research isn't always the truth. Like in Burundi with traditional food, it's all depands on province where you're from. Some of us grow patatoes, lots of them, sweet potatoes, Amasaka, Uburo, Amahonda, beans, peas and also grow cows not for decoration but to sell and eat, use milk as well, goats and not forgetting chicken including vegetables and misigati-sugar canes -. While other provinces grow cassava, yam, sweet potatoes, sugar canes, beans, amateke, rice, maize , bananas, Palm oil, and live near lakes and fishing a lot. Some grow tea and coffee, and chicken too, and all the good stuff. We appreciate your research but please dig dipped, visit everywhere not just in the city where there isn't anything grown beside heat :) then write good information. Whatever happens to oranges, ripe bananas, lemons, amapera, mangos, Imitagafero, papayas, amashu (cabagge), lengarenga ( red root),amashindwe, tangerines, mandazis, fish from Lake tanganyika or other small rivers? Like I said, travel, do your research, don'tstay in the city where they buy everything in the store and think that the milk is produced from a bycicle then put it on the page. We might be poor, but we have good food.

libbys7
2 reviews
0 helpful votes
4/27/17

A well known encyclopedia that has all the info you may need within your studies or just to know more (shame wiki is not the good source to enter into the study papers).

caysm
3 reviews
0 helpful votes
4/2/17

Came here to say thanks to these guys for this awesome free service. It helped me a lot throughout my studies and also in just some casual situations - you can find any info here, just ANY!

chrisp188
13 reviews
12 helpful votes
3/25/17

I've relied on this site in middle school, high school, and college, and now I just use it for general information gathering. I hope it will always be around.

jesser2
44 reviews
97 helpful votes
3/1/17

I just got yet another block for "block evasion" even though my IP wasn't under any block at the time. They will block people without any sort of warning. What happened was that some other IP address edited my talk page in a way that made me seem like it was me, but it wasn't.

If they got rid of the corrupt admins like Favonian and Materialscientist, they could be a much better site.
But right now they care way too much about punishment rather than spreading knowledge. It's depressing that Google will instantly send people to Wikipedia for most searches.

johnj355
4 reviews
2 helpful votes
2/22/17

I love Wikipedia! Where else can you learn everything you wanted to know all in one place. I get lost here for hours!

ryann47
1 review
0 helpful votes
2/15/17

Wikipedia is generally a reliable source for information, especially recent news and more obscure topics. Granted, some articles are tenuous and need more verification, and Wikipedia has a vandalism and slight problem, but in my experience the Wikipedia interfaces make it easy for anyone to just correct any wrongs as long as the information is correctly referenced. I would give it a B plus because, although it's convenient, it's not always correct, so double check every Wikipedia article if you think something is wrong.

Service
Value
Quality
helenm123
51 reviews
32 helpful votes
1/16/17

Be careful of the information that you learn on this website, many articles contain contradictions and factual inaccuracies in them. The website is open to whomever wants to edit and write articles, therefore exercise critical thinking skills and take facts learned from the articles on this website with a grain of salt. Recommended with reservations and advice.

Quality
jefb1
1 review
1 helpful vote
9/7/16

As a source of information, I might give Wikipedia 2 or 3 stars. They do have an extensive collection, but certainly not everything. But, the quality of writing in ways that make the information accessible to anyone is very inconsistent. The authors (and Wikipedia should encourage this) should link to external sites for more technical content.

I just tried posting a set of 4 interrelated pages. And, I'm already screaming and thinking about posting elsewhere.

1. The whole interface is obtuse and far more difficult than it needs to be.
2. Instructions are often wrong (e.g., they say to click on "Save Page" when there is no such button or link) or incomplete (they say to do so and so, but they give you no clue as to where to do this).
3. To get help, you have to go through this completely ridiculous process of posting a question. Why not just have a forum in the typical forum format? Why make it so difficult? It took me 6 tries to get a question posted.
4. They should have all of their instructions and taboos posted in a one simple to access and read area. But, no... they make you dig for it, just guess, or find out the hard way when they reject a page.
5. There should be a way to easily communicate with one individual who made a decision to reject so that you have a consistent way of making changes.

I've worked extensively on Wikidot sites and with their forum. There is a night and day difference. I just find Wikipedia to be frustrating in all aspects from the posting angle, and, I'm not sure how to express this, but there is some deeply embedded ignorance/stupidity or arrogance that prevents them from doing something other than a giant framework of obsolescence. Some group needs to do something better and push out Wikipedia.

Service
Quality
ericas30
3 reviews
2 helpful votes
8/20/16

I try not to use it as a source for research, but pretty good website if you want to find some interesting facts.

accomplicek
5 reviews
15 helpful votes
5/1/16

Wikipedia would be thrown out of court for heresay. As a human in my mid 40's, I've been a living witness to some of the information posted there. Everything from broadcast airdates to scientific information is bastardized here. Sure, they try, but isn't Wikipedia *really* a reductive version of *THE WHOLE ENTIRE INTERNET*?! Using Wikipedia as a reliable source is as ridiculous as asking the guy on the bus sitting next to you. Good luck with that. If you want to get away from *lazy journalism/research*, you have to stay away from Wikipedia and scrub the 'net yourself.

rodrigod5
57 reviews
32 helpful votes
4/21/16

Simply the best resource for information on any topic!

mikec204
4 reviews
3 helpful votes
2/16/16

Needless to say that wikipedia is a great online informational website where you are sure to get loads of information about practically any subject.

cameronk20
1 review
3 helpful votes
2/8/16

Tons of information on various topics.

Service
Value
Shipping
Returns
Quality
philk25
1 review
1 helpful vote
1/30/16

Wikipedia is a wonderful concept and potentially great site. Problem is, for years, racist, sexist, administrators have blocked various IP addresses and accounts I used to correct their racism, and erroneously on-sided, biased articles regarding sexism, Vietnam War, Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, etc. Wikipedia or another organization (possibly an NGO, etc) should do more to end bullying by some of the wikipedia Admins/editors and to also ensure that articles don't spread racism and ignorance at the expense of females, Africans, Indians, and non-Europeans.

flyf3
1 review
3 helpful votes
1/21/16

Awesome resource!

Value
jamesp199
27 reviews
14 helpful votes
1/12/16

Wikipedia is one of the natural wonders of the internet. A totally free resource to learn and get data about pretty much anything. It should be bookmarked by everyone.

jasong69
21 reviews
25 helpful votes
1/11/16

Wikipedia needs no introduction, most people on the internet has visited this site multiple times. Its a great fee resource for information on most anything. You can learn a lot just by surfing through their different article. Check out the random page link for interesting articles.

Service
Value
Quality
danielw77
2 reviews
10 helpful votes
12/30/15

No ads makes the website so easy to use. The amount of information they give on any one subject is amazing.

justint42
118 reviews
1,608 helpful votes
12/28/15

What can I say about Wikipedia. This is the first stop for anything you don't know. Excellent

ankits8
6 reviews
3 helpful votes
12/1/15

I use it all the time! They have an article on almost everything

lucag11
2 reviews
16 helpful votes
11/1/15

Admin Eumolpo blocked my account and erased all my contributions after I added a video-critic about Italian Political Religious Economical business moviment "Comunione e Liberazione".

He just mentioned ¨vandalism¨ in his blocking tag, I contacted him several times in several ways but no answer.

Tip for consumers: Remember that all what you have written on Wikipedia can be deleted without any reason by any administrator.

Service
Value
nojinp
43 reviews
61 helpful votes
9/28/15

When I study or need to satisfy my curiosity, I visit here.
I've never seen wrong information yet there. It's hard to believe the information is made by volunteers. I thank them..and the founder.

lf13
24 reviews
22 helpful votes
9/7/15

There are enough alternatives where this site is no longer the game in town. The world is moving into a far more decentralized direction that is much less at the whims of mainstream views and popular culture.

Note: Decentralization means that it is distributed across various pods to prevent control from any major controlling body. At least that was its original intent, but that's a topic for another time.

The fact that some articles can have such an obvious pro mainstream slant goes totally against the idea of neutral independent journalism.

If one tried presenting honest information, it's very easy to get a new pseudonym to edit the article in a way that completely erases that glaring issue about any topic that is creepily and eerily mainstream because of it's outdated old decentralized design that is not up to date with social networks--the old--Diaspora.

The elephant in the room here that nobody is talking about, is how most of my friends are moving onto using other wiki software that do not have this tired slant. I don't know of anybody that uses Wikipedia anymore.

One good thing though I will proudly leave the review with, is that it represents early efforts to test out the concept of decentralization. In this respect, I am still greatfull that the site still exists. Why need a history text-book when you can go see the monument itself.

1 rating was submitted through the Sitejabber Browser Extension

Customer Questions & Answers

Helpful answer
0
Votes
Thanks for voting!
Not as helpful
Question:
Answer:

Maybe you can begin by trying to write proper English.

By jabba t. on 11/1/15
Questions? Get answers from the Wikipedia staff and other customers.
Note: this is not for reviews - click here to write a review
Get notified about new answers to your questions.
Posting guidelines
Typical questions asked:
  • How long does shipping take?
  • What is the return policy?
  • Where is the company located?

Sites You Might Also Like

×
Have a question about
Wikipedia?
Post Review