I, like the majority of Internet users, use Wikipedia. Sometimes it's hard not to, as it's the one of the first results returned when you search for something. I do however take Wikipedia with a pinch of salt, usually looking at the cited sources for an article and I'd never NEVER use Wikiepdia for academic purposes (unless I was looking, again, at cited sources). The following news snippet is a good example of why you shouldn't use Wikipedia for academic purposes, and it has extra relevance as it involves company information...
Up to 60% of Wikipedia entries about companies are incorrect, according to research published in the Public Relations Journal. It doesn't matter the provenance of those mistakes, be it just plain wrong information or attempts at sabotage, but what is more important is that the mistakes don't necessarily get fixed very quickly. Researchers surveyed 1,284 PR people and found that of those who contacted Wikipedia about factual errors on their company entries, 40% heard back in days, 12% weeks and 24% never received any reply at all. Fair enough, Wikipedia is not a public relations tool, but you'd expect errors to be corrected quicker than that.
So the moral of the story is, if you want accurate company information, use the library's electronic resources. We have a series of guides on finding good business information:
Case Studies: Advertising
Case Studies: Business
Company Information
Industrial Sector Information
Market Research Data
Product Information
SWOT Analysis
Look at these, not Wikipedia! And in case you don't believe me, here's the research itself:
DiStaso, M. (2012) Measuring Public Relations Wikipedia Engagement:How Bright is the Rule? Public Relations Journal 6(2) 1-24
***** Update ****** Very interesting comment left (thanks for that
Nihiltres), which critically analyses the research and suggests that it is lacking in rigour. That doesn't mean you should use Wikipedia for academic research however.
