Wikipedia: reader beware

I recently assigned a group of Grade 7-10 church history students a research project. I observed them as they began their work on their personal computers and for many their first stop was Wikipedia. On an average day, I would probably check something on Wikipedia myself at least two or three times. But who can guarantee that all the information on Wikipedia is accurate and unbiased? As it turns out, bias is also a problem on this website. And that’s particularly evident in the realm of controversial subjects like creationism and Intelligent Design (ID).

A recent example involved Dr. Günter Bechly, a paleontologist and entomologist affiliated with the Discovery Institute, an organization promoting ID. He is notable for his groundbreaking research on fossil insects. Wikipedia used to include an article about Dr. Bechly. However, it was deleted after prejudiced pro-Darwin editors decided he was not notable enough to be included anymore. Wikipedia is unreliable in terms of what it withholds from the public eye.

It’s also unreliable in terms of how it presents the material that it does include on ID. For example, the main article on ID (as of Nov. 13) asserts in the opening paragraph that ID is a “pseudoscience” and “a religious argument for the existence of God.” So Wikipedia prejudicially discounts any scientific basis for ID. Though pro-ID contributors have tried to edit the article (as anyone can normally do), the volunteer Wiki editors always switch it back or lock the article down.

Wikipedia can be helpful for checking basic facts like dates. But once one gets into areas of controversy or opinion, its usefulness and objectivity begin to diminish. The problem is that human beings edit it. And human beings all have that heart condition: notoriously prone to deceive and be deceived. While editors of the print encyclopedias of the past were not immune to this condition, because there was a monetary incentive involved there were more checks and balances. Today, more than ever, we have to do our own checking. Apply the wisdom of Proverbs 18:17, “The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.” Just because you read it on Wikipedia doesn’t make it true!

Dr. Bredenhof is the pastor of the Free Reformed Church in Launceston, Tasmania, and he blogs at Yinkahdinay.



  1. Sam

    November 20, 2017 at 8:21 am

    You’ll want to have a look at the website It’s a project whose goal is to restore sanity to the world of “open knowledge” and wiki-variety public editing. is a dynamic fork of Wikipedia, which allows its organizers to oversee and develop the work in such a way as to keep the open source knowledge flow from being thoroughly corrupted by overzealously biased editing. As such, you still have to remain aware that it is an “open source knowledge repository”, with many of the weaknesses inherent in such a format. But you won’t find the ideological censoring that rules Wikipedia.

    Here’s their link to their copy of Dr. Bechley’s now-deleted Wiki page:

  2. Latayne C Scott

    November 20, 2017 at 8:43 am

    As a teacher of middle school and high school kids in a classical Christian academy, I told my students never to use Wikipedia, partially because of the reasons you stated. I also told their parents of another issue: hyperlinks in an “innocent” article can lead to other articles. I don’t know if you’ve looked up a term for any sexual behavior on Wikipedia recently, like “oral sex,” but you will find it is illustrated so graphically that it will make you blush and qualifies it as porn.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Most Popular

Our mission is "To promote a Biblically Reformed perspective in all spheres of life by equipping and encouraging Christians to think, speak, and act in a manner consistent with their confession."

Sign up for the weekly RP Roundup

Get the week's posts delivered to your email inbox. Sign up, and if you don't get a quick confirmation, check your spam folder.
* = required field

powered by MailChimp!

Follow Us

Copyright © 2016 Reformed Perspective Magazine | Site by Soapbox Studios

To Top