The 3 building blocks of trustworthy information: Lessons from Wikipedia

The world is experiencing an erosion of shared standards for what counts as trustworthy information-and whose voices are deemed credible. Institutions once seen as stewards of knowledge-science, journalism, academia-face declining levels of public trust. At the same time, many people are turning to online spaces and personalities that feel more relatable, even if they are less reliable. To rebuild a shared baseline, we need consensus on what trustworthy information should look like.

As part of the vast and varied online information ecosystem, Wikipedia has managed to build global trust thanks to three simple but powerful policies. They are the foundation of how reliable information on Wikipedia is built and offer a model for all:

• Neutral point of view: Wikipedia articles must present information fairly as far as possible without bias.
• Verifiability: All information must come from published, reliable sources that readers can check themselves.
• No original research: Wikipedia doesn't publish personal opinions or new interpretations-it summarizes what has already been published elsewhere from reliable sources.

These policies, created in Wikipedia's early days 24 years ago, still guide the work of hundreds of thousands of volunteer editors who add content to the site and underpin an encyclopedia read by more than 15 billion people each month. They are not just rules for a website-they are standards the wider information ecosystem can learn from.

Neutral point of view: Balance through collaboration

Neutral point of view (NPOV) is one of the most distinct and important principles of Wikipedia. It asks volunteer editors to "represent fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." Editors are not tasked with deciding which view is correct; their role is to document what each credible source has published.

This stands in sharp contrast to most online platforms, where content thrives by taking sides. Wikipedia, by design, is written not for one audience or ideology but for everyone.

Of course, no individual can write perfectly free of bias. That's why Wikipedia's collaborative model matters: through discussion, edits, and consensus-building, neutrality is something achieved collectively. In fact, research on Wikipedia has consistently shown that articles tend to improve in quality and reliability as more people contribute to them.

The reason is straightforward: each editor brings different knowledge, cultural context, and potential biases. When these are openly surfaced and debated among volunteers, the final article reflects a negotiated consensus rather than one person's individual perspective. Mistakes are quickly spotted, gaps are filled, and sources are checked against each other. When a Wikipedia article has numerous editors contributing, the outcome is an article that is reflective of a plurality of viewpoints from the available sources.

Video by Asaf Bartov/Wikimedia Foundation, CC BY-SA 4.0

New initiatives to guide neutrality

Maintaining neutrality is an evolving challenge. The Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit that hosts Wikipedia, has collaborated with volunteer editors to introduce several new efforts reinforcing this commitment. These are intended to support and guide Wikipedia contributors on the concept of neutral point of view on the encyclopedia:

• We recently launched a new neutral point of view module on the WikiLearn platform, part of the Wikimedia Core Curriculum. Short videos break down key practices-be encyclopedic, write without taking sides, write for the whole world, and avoid undue weight.
• The Foundation also convened a working group of editors, trustees, researchers, and advisors to study how NPOV is applied across languages on Wikipedia. The working group has published an initial analysis of NPOV on Wikipedia, and will be sharing additional recommendations for how NPOV standards might evolve globally.

These efforts show that neutrality is not static. Wikipedia articles are frequently updated as new sources come out. This ensures that readers gain access to a comprehensive understanding of the topics that matter to them, and that the information on those topics may also grow and evolve. It requires constant reflection, debate, and adaptation-the same qualities needed in broader conversations about trustworthy information online.

Verifiability and no original research: Building with sources

The other two core policies-verifiability and no original research-ensure that Wikipedia does not exist in a vacuum of opinion. All content must be grounded in published, reliable sources including books, research, news articles and academic publications.

"Verifiability" means every fact can be checked by readers; citations link directly to the source from every article. If you're skeptical, you can click through and decide for yourself. "No original research" reinforces this safeguard, prohibiting personal interpretation, unpublished claims, or unverified data.

This approach counters some of the internet's worst tendencies: rumor without attribution, personal speculation presented as fact, and viral misinformation. Instead, it redirects readers back to published sources and embeds accountability within the article itself. These principles are also supported by tools and bots that preserve citations so that when webpages and links to sources may change, a record of them is always accessible on Wikipedia.

What qualifies as a "reliable source"? This question sparks constant discussion and debate among Wikipedia editors. Accuracy, fact-checking processes, transparency, and correction policies of primary source publications all play into decisions. For example, peer-reviewed research and journals or established news organizations with documented editorial standards are generally considered reliable, while self-published blogs, partisan outlets, or outlets with no history of issuing corrections are usually not.

Further, on Wikipedia, the reliability of a source isn't fixed. Volunteers may together reassess and change their view on a source's reliability as new information becomes available. Reliability isn't based on any one editor's opinion, but on how other publications and evidence evaluate the source in question.

Why these policies matter beyond Wikipedia

Wikipedia's three content policies require effort, discussion, and continuous enforcement through millions of edits every year. They remain even more relevant than ever as people need trustworthy information on the internet.

At their core, these policies provide an operational definition starting point for trustworthy information:

• Written without taking sides.
• Backed by a verifiable source.
• Never invented or speculative.

This is not just Wikipedia's formula for reliability-it is a blueprint for rebuilding collective trust in knowledge. There is much to learn from how Wikipedia has embedded these standards into everyday practice at global scale.

Wikipedia is not complete, finished, or flawless. But it offers a working, living example of how a broad community can strive to build reliable knowledge together. In an age of fractured information, its three core policies are a model worth building on within the wider digital ecosystem.