Online Information Sources - What Do You Believe?

With the number of online 'user-shared information portals,' Social Sites, Article directories and the like, it's hard to know when you're getting legitimate information.

I'm working on a list of 'legitimate' sites to post here in the near future and am learning about 'validity-checking' myself, in general areas on the internet.

As a student, I already know what higher-education institutions require as legitimate information checking online (that is, if I use an online source, I know the guidelines as to what is considered legitimate information or not). I am slightly less knowledgeable about pure business legitimacy, so I have some work to do yet before I post reliable information about 'online business' sources.

One tip I can give for ANY kind of information you're going to use online involves how to use Wikipedia.

Wikipedia is NOT a definitive, authority site, by any means. It is a 'collective' contribution by internet users all around the world who choose to add information to the Wikipedia site.

Many information pages at Wikipedia are without citations and proof of legitimacy. Very truly, SOME of the information found at Wikipedia is OPINION. Some of it is misinterpreted data, mis-informed reports about topics that, although someone tried to research, may not have been researched thoroughly enough.

I use Wikipedia very often, however, I choose to go to the Wikipedia site, using the information therein as a 'guideline' and a starting point - mostly for topics that I know absolutely nothing about. I enter the Wikipedia site with the intent to gain basic information and ultimately, follow the 'citation' links right back OUT of the Wikipedia site. If the citation links lead to an 'edu,' 'org,' 'gov' or other such site, then Wikipedia has served it's purpose for me. It is at the 'out-linked' sites that I can find better (perhaps original) information, but I may have been completely unaware of how to find 'original' information before I started reading articles over at Wikipedia.

This is not to imply that NONE of the information at Wikipedia is 'correct' or 'legitimate' or that all information there is unreliable. On the contrary. There are a TON of great, proper, well-researched and well-cited entries over at the Wikipedia site. It's just that I take particular care in checking the links that are within the articles I'm reading at the site. If almost all of the links are just internal, leading mainly back into the Wikipedia system (for definitions, related information, etc), then I don't consider this situation to be of legitimate value to me, though I will follow links and keep information in mind that I find internally at the site. I don't consider my information search to be completed at this point, however, I have usually gained some good general information by this point. Nothing I would use in a University paper, but information that allows me to be a little more familiar with the topic I started searching on - so that I can conduct a more intense search elsewhere.

I see forums posts and even pay-for-article material (Articles that you have to pay for) that use only Wikipedia as their source of authority - and this concerns me very much.

I have a friend who is a budding internet marketer. He uses Wikipedia in his promotions. He is listed as an Internet marketer and wrote his own article about himself, set up 'tagging' and keywords so that people will go to Wikipedia and see his name there - along with Historical figures, celebrities, etc. The average internet user considers Wikipedia as somewhat of an online encyclopedia, so using Wikipedia for marketing is actually a really awesome and effective tactic for marketers to use. It makes a marketer seem 'famous' and 'important' if they are in some kind of an 'encyclopedia' system! But the truth is - you can probably gain an account at Wikipedia and write an article yourself - about yourself - without too many problems. Or - you could submit an article to a fellow-member of Wikipedia and ask for editing help and if they do some research - some fact-checking on you, your information can still end up in Wikipedia, even if you're 'a slouch' at writing articles.

In short, any 'business information' topics that I research at Wikipedia MUST LEAD TO Better Business Bureau information and show a 'scam-list' clean status for me to believe that the business I am checking out has legitimacy. Otherwise, some relatively unknown 'newbie' could have written his or her own article, claiming that their business has skyrocketed in activity, is a leading, #1 business - and I wouldn't know the difference from the entries that tell me that "Coca-Cola" is a hugely successful company! (Well - there would be a LOT more links in an Coca-Cola article that would lead to other legitimate business reports, so the information on 'Coca-Cola' would not be as highly questioned).

Anyhow, I hope this helps you think carefully about the information sources you use online.