reasons why wikipedia is not a good source
Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a reliable source Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone at any time. This means that any information it contains at any particular time could be vandalism. Biographies of living persons are especially vulnerable to this issue. Some edits on Wikipedia that are in error are sometimes fixed, however because Wikipedia cannot monitor contributions made by millions of users, there are many errors that remain unnoticed for days, weeks, months, and even years. Therefore, Wikipedia should not be considered a source for 'fact-checking'.
Pentagon Papers On June 18, 1971, The Washington Post began publishing its own series of articles based upon the Pentagon Papers;[9] Ellsberg had given portions to the Post reporter Ben Bagdikian. Bagdikian brought the information to editor Ben Bradlee. That day, Assistant U.S. Attorney General William Rehnquist asked the Post to cease publication. After the paper refused, Rehnquist sought an injunction in U.S. district court. Judge Murray Gurfein declined to issue such an injunction, writing that "[t]he security of the Nation is not at the ramparts alone. Security also lies in the value of our free institutions. A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, a ubiquitous press must be suffered by those in authority to preserve the even greater values of freedom of expression and the right of the people to know."[26] The government appealed that decision, and on June 26 the Supreme Court agreed to hear it jointly with the New York Times case.[25] Fifteen other newspapers received copies of the study and began publishing it.[9]