wikipedia Should Not Be A Monopoly

This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wiki's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.

Shortcut WP:MONOPOLY

It was once in the top 10 websites, and is still in the top 15 websites. However, Wikipedia is still only one encyclopedia. On most search engines, particularly Google and Bing, Wikipedia articles are often the first result to appear from searching.

Because Wikipedia is ubiquitous, many people will assume that content on a Wikipedia page is absolute truth. This should be highly discouraged, especially for lesser-known articles. In some occasions, a single person is behind most of the article's content. Since most editors are volunteer editors, and WikiMedia does not hire paid editors, people sometimes do not have the time or energy to check for notability on every single source. As a result, many articles with undue weight or lacking reliable sources are simply overlooked, or examined once then never brought up again.

Take the time to explore other websites and encyclopedias to gain different perspectives. Carefully look through the sources to see if they really match up with Wikipedia's claims. Encyclopedia Britannica still exists, and the quality of its writing is excellent. The articles are not as detailed, but as a whole, they are more carefully researched and organized. Fandom contains many fan Wikis that focus on various subcultures and TV shows. They could provide more depth than Wiki English. The Oxford Research Encyclopedias are a valuable online resource for academics in many different fields. Also, check out the List of wikis.