The Australian news site News.com.au is currently reporting that "Refugee Tribunal Hit For Relying on Wikipedia." The tribunal's decision was set aside because it has used unreliable information. Ironically, the site was not Wikipedia (as suggested by News.com.au), but rather armeniapedia.org.
Unreliable Information
One Comment
Recent Posts
“Shock” and the Bondi Beach Chanukah Massacre 
The Catch-22 of Canadian Digital Sovereignty 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 253: Guy Rub on the Unconvincing Case for a New Canadian Artists’ Resale Right 
The Most Unworkable Internet Law in the World: Quebec Opens the Door to Mandating Minimum French Content Quotas for User Generated Content on Social Media 
CRTC Says No Regulatory Action Planned Against Meta For Blocking News Links
A very recent decision from the Arbitration Center for .EU Disputes ([ link ]) vigorously criticizes the use of Wikipedia:
“… collaborative websites with permissive edits have little probative value. “[A]nyone can alter the content of Wikipedia at any time, casting doubt on the validity of the information contained therein”, the International Trademark Association wrote in a June 23, 2006 letter (published at shapeblog.com/Beresford Wikipedia.pdf).
A Wikipedia article cannot be seen as reliable information in proceedings, as it can be manipulated before the proceedings, to serve the interests of a party …”