Several answers on the site are from wikia (several of MY answers are based off of wikia...)

How reliable is the information contained in the wikia pages. They do not have the careful curation of sources like wikipedia, for one.

  • 8
    They should be regarded as tertiary sources and be taken with a grain of salt.
    – кяαzєя Mod
    Commented Sep 15, 2014 at 19:55

2 Answers 2


As someone who has contributed to a lot of Wikia sites, I can really only say it depends on the Wiki.

Some are very, VERY strict, like Wikipedia, and reject edits that do not cite sources. Others are not as strict, and let information go without citing sources (unless it gets controversial). And lastly, a few will just let whoever do whatever and sources are rarely found in Wikis like this.

I agree with Krazer that we should look at tertiary sources, or at the very least the person posting the Wikia answer should be familiar enough with the series to confirm and clarify the details provided. Just dumping the Wikia response (or worse, just the link) for the OP is not helpful and should be discouraged.


Basically, you can always figure out if it's reliable or not. If there are no citations whatsoever and most of the pages are 1-2 sentence long, along with many missing pages, it's not a good source. If there are a many references, screenshots, quotes, and overall it's somewhat like (or better than) Wikipedia, then it's a reliable source.

A gaming example would be the official and any unofficial Team Fortress 2 wiki. The difference is huge.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .