Cautionary tale: "Don't trust Wikipedia"
In her latest column, Toronto Star public editor Kathy English shares the story of Star intern Michael Woods, who learned the hard way how damaging unverified information can be.
Woods reported on the death of Rick Rypien, the 27-year-old Vancouver Canucks winger who was recently found dead after losing a hard-fought battle with depression. By all accounts Rypien had received full support from the Canucks organization through his troubles.
In his report, Woods quoted Canucks general manager Mike Gillis as having referred to Rypien as “crazy” in an interview last November with Vancouver Sun columnist Iain MacIntyre. What was the source of this information? Not the Vancouver Sun itself, but Wikipedia.
As it turns out, Gillis never said any such thing. The team issued a statement blasting the Star for publishing inaccurate, unfair information. In light of the mistake, the Star’s editor, Michael Cooke, sent a memo to the entire newsroom reminding them that information obtained from Wikipedia must be verified elsewhere. The Star also issued an apology the same day... but for Woods, the regret will linger.
"I’m not going to make excuses. It was an awful mistake, I did not do my due diligence," he said.
Comment Policy
J-Source invites comments on any content items or on any other topics relevant to journalism. Those posting comments are expected to adhere to standards of accuracy and fairness that would be recognized by those who practise, teach or study journalism.
- Comments are restricted to registered users. You must register with your full first and last name in order to be eligible to comment.
- Please communicate as effectively and intelligently as you would in a professional or academic forum, focusing on the issues at hand rather than the characters or characteristics of those involved.
- This forum is intended for discussion of the craft of journalism, not of the issues of the day that journalists cover; please do not post story tips or press releases.
- We moderate the forum for adherence to these standards of discourse, and reserve the right to decline any comment or restrict any user from commenting without giving reasons. Every effort is made to approve valid comments within 24 hours of submission.



Comments
I got my knuckles rapped several years ago by a smart editor because I used Wikipedia. I was being lazy, and in a way, dumb, and I'm glad someone warned me about the unreliability of the site.
I'm surprised students aren't given the same advice. What do their professors tell them? "Go ahead, Wikipedia is a great source."
Still, I see long-time journalists pull info from the site. Is this more a comment on the quality of journalism?