Dark matter at 5800 An investigation of the quality of user-contributed entries on the topic of dark matter in Wikipedia and other types of texts

Abstract

Statistics have shown that Wikipedia is very frequently used by the general public and that its articles rank high in online search engines. However, the accuracy and general quality of Wikipedia have been debated over the years. This study aims to investigate the quality of Wikipedia by expert reviewers pertaining to the accuracy, currency, breadth, readability, im-ages, structure, neutrality and relevance of a Wikipedia entry on dark matter. The entry has over 5800 edits. A comparison to two other centrally controlled sources, edited by acclaimed experts was also made. Data was collected by asking a number of qualified experts to review and rate three different texts, one published by NASA, one by Encyclopaedia Britannica and one from the English language version of Wikipedia. An interview with one of the experts was also carried out. The results showed that Wikipedia scored better than the other texts in all examined variables except for readability. Wikipedia was the preferred source by all but one panel members and its credibility was considered high. This review indicates that both NASA’s and Encyclopaedia Britannica’s articles on dark matter had a lower degree of quality than expected considering their brands’ high level of credibility. This report encourages the use of Wikipedia both for reference and as a platform to communicate, revise and correct re-search.