References to information at Wikipedia have shown up in various inappropriate places, from homework assignments to college term papers. But there’s one place that it seems everyone can agree that it doesn’t belong: the US court system. The US Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, ruling in an immigration case, has agreed with the Board of Immigration Appeals in finding that a reliance on information in Wikipedia is insufficient grounds for a ruling. Nevertheless, it sent the case back to the Board, requesting that it clarify its decision.
Appeals court smacks down judge for relying on Wikipedia
Well, this is certain to warm the hearts of law librarians and teachers of legal research everywhere. Of course, somewhere along the line someone forgot to let some law student how to distinguish a reliable, authoritative source from one not so reliable or authoritative. Sure, Wikipedia is great for finding the rules to Arena League Football, or getting up to speed on the Evil Dead movies, but not so much for stuff that really matters like answering legal questions. Lawyers have a multitude of reliable and authoritative resources at their disposal, both free and paid, so it is pretty much inexcusable to cite Wikipedia in a legal document.