I used Wikipedia as a source here in the politics section and was told it's not a reliable source. There was an attempt to start a FAQ in the FTM section and when asked what was wrong with using the Wiki here at Susans, it turned out to be outdated. (A member volunteered to update it) So why does Wikileaks get a pass as "The Truth"? Isn't it as unreliable as any other Wiki? Hugs, Devlyn
Wikipedia was actually found to be roughly as accurate as the Encyclopedia Britannica a number of years ago. How exactly it hasn't devolved into a wasteland of scum and villainy like everything else on the internet I have no idea. However, as far as academic sources go, an encyclopedia of any variety is unacceptable as you need original rather than secondary sources. For example, I would never use Wikipedia as a source for a factual change made while editing. The author would be... unimpressed, and rightly so. That doesn't mean Wikipedia isn't still useful, it just means you have to go to the source links at the end of the article.
Wikileaks gets a pass because it publishes original rather than secondary documents. The commentary, of course, should still be considered a secondary source.
You are (in this case) using the web as a giant research library. Now, once upon a time people who used research libraries (RL)* had something in common. They were trained researchers, and part of that training included sceptisism by the truckload. You are trained to walk in and know (KNOW) that well over half of what is written in all those works is wrong, demonstrably false, misleading, unsupported, inaccurate, or simply out-of-date. But casual users tend to think that because something was published in a book (or on the web) that it must be true in some sense.
Wikipedia is awesome in some areas, woefully inadequate in others. It's also written by committee more or less, and since all data and conclusions are biased it's hard to find information on the author/collector and reach an independent conclusion on that bias. The stuff is being checked - more or less - and over time gets more right, still it has shortcomings. And all information - web, books, TV - is outdated by the time you read it in this 'that's so 47 seconds ago' world we live in. Particularly in areas of rapid change, and 'trans stuff' is an area of rapid change.
That's wikipedia, and there are several sites set up on that model. But Wikileaks is not like that. It's not an ongoing effort, it's a dump site. It's not (though it once was) able to be edited by readers. It does not invite all users to edit any page or to create new pages - so even though it still has wiki in the name, it's no longer a wiki.
How do you know its true? Well, you can't prosecute someone for releasing fiction**, so when the Gov get's its panties in a wad and starts arresting people and trying to shut-down the site, well that's pretty good proof that what they put up was 'the official document'. Notice I didn't say 'true' because most of the 'official documents' are nothing more than a tissue of lies. And a lot of what when up in the recent MidEast deal was all the stuff that pointed out who was lying about what. (Everyone was lying, and they tended to be lying about just about everything.)
And just like the government and business is telling us that 'privacy is dead' because of the web (and it was on life support before it), they might have to face the disconcerting possibility that along with individual privacy, 'secret' gov/corporate/business records are also a thing of the past. Horse n' buggy, ice box with ice in it, and nickle candy bars level gone. If - in the deep dark past - I wanted to release that stuff I would have had to physically go to the files (if I could find them - the location of secret files is itself a top secret, right?), take them out, copy them (and copies are watched), and then move them. It would take me months and months, I would need a huge area to store them, a semi to move them. But. But, I have a phone with a 32gb data card no bigger than my fingernail. I can jack that phone into any system using a USB cable, and in a matter of a few moments I can (if I zip them) download well over a million individual sheets of paper onto that card. What took months and trucks, now takes less time than having a cup of coffee and zero space.
Luckly for America my card is full of classical and jazz music, 20 full Grateful Dead concerts from their original tapes (18 of which I was at), the entire Bob Dylan catalog (I like Bob), 30 or more live shows from various soundboard recordings (don't ask, don't tell) including 8 awesome Jeff Beck concerts, and 4 Zepplin show/runs (First Fillmore show, second Fillmore show, the complete Earl's Court in 75 - their high point - and the LA/Long Beach shows from June of 73***) Really, that weekend they went from being a 'band' to being The Hammer of the Gods, the biggest, best, super-group of all super-groups for all times and forever too. You can literally 'hear' them change right in the middle of the 4th song, Over the Hills and Far Away - they found a way to 'turn it up' and rock was never the same. Along with a bunch of pics of people, and stuff, and fashions, and midget porn. So I'm limited in how many secret files I can upload.
So, let's see, State Department 'secrets' proving they were lying or live Zeppelin (there is a 28 minute No Quarter from Earl's Court that is truly epic - they were so, so, so much better live, like the Dead, that listening to the studio recordings is just a total waste of time and plastic)? Easy choice, I already knew they were lying.
Wiki is a Hawaiian word meaning 'fast' or 'quick' BTW.
* - not all libraries are RLs, only a few are. They tend to have material in the millions of entries (mine had over 8 million books, magazines, films, papers et.all.) Most of which is rare - and can not be checked out, so it's not the place you go for the new book to take to the beach. They are limited to people who have a real need (scholars, academics, troublemakers) to use the material. The most notable example around here is the Bancroft Library at UC Berkeley. Stanford has a good one too in some areas.
** - not so fast there, you can get put in jail for writing fictional accounts of sex with minors. Yes, fiction. Freedom of speech. Watch what you say.
*** - I think they released most of this commercially a few years ago under the title How The West Was Won.
I just use the main Wikipedia and most of their information is accurate. I was cheating on this Who Wants to be A Millionare and I used Wikipedia and I got all the answers right.