Is Wikipedia a reliable reference for the physics student?

[KurtLudwig]

In the past, many others have asked this same question. Some teachers and professors have discouraged using Wikipedia. Articles in Wikipedia are followed by a list of books and references for further study. Except for string theory and loop quantum gravity theory, physics is less "political" than other areas of study, such as history, biography and music. I tend to believe that Wikipedia is a good starting source for the student of physics. Please comment.
KurtLudwig

 

[AbstractlyAlgebraic]

I find the articles to be pretty readable once you're far enough into the classes that you're familiar with basic terms and stuff.

 

[phinds]

It's spotty. I've seen knowledgeable folks here on PF comment on specific articles (generally somewhat advanced topics) that they say are really awful, but I think it's a good resource for most stuff, you just have to take it with a grain of salt.

 

[fresh_42]

In the past, many others have asked this same question. Some teachers and professors have discouraged using Wikipedia. Articles in Wikipedia are followed by a list of books and references for further study. Except for string theory and loop quantum gravity theory, physics is less "political" than other areas of study, such as history, biography and music. I tend to believe that Wikipedia is a good starting source for the student of physics. Please comment.
KurtLudwig

I share this opinion. The closer a subject is to mainstream science, the more reliable is Wikipedia. I often use it to look up definitions or the basics. If you want to get more and deeper information, the links on Wikipedia are a good source, or the technical terms to search the internet. If in doubt, I'm looking for university pages: lecture notes, seminar notes etc. There are also some nuances which might not always be true. I've recently read here on PF the distinction between a ring and a pseudo-ring. A notion I've never heard of before and I would never make. It is likely, that similar issues can be found on Wikipedia. What I like about it is the possibility to switch languages. You can often find different entries on different language pages. e.g proofs, formulas. Especially formulas don't depend a lot on the language. If someone has proven the value of a given series, I don't care in which language it is done. I also use it a lot for translations. The technical terms are far better translated on Wikipedia than in dictionaries: look up the term you know (work (physics)) and then switch to the language (espanol) you want to translate it to (trabajo (física)). The dictionary gave me ten possible translations.