Wikipedia vs. scholarly articles: are they both biased?

I really liked the comments that I received for this blogpost as they furthered and advanced my thinking even more regarding the topic of Wikipedia and whether or not this serves to be a reliable resource for academic research, and even general inquiries. Before reading the comments, I would have not thought of the comparable biased nature of research and scientists, who do, indeed, decide what exactly they research and how the research is carried out. This serves to be just as biased as the point raised by Royal and Kapila (2009) as topics that are interesting to the scientist and researcher are the ones that are going to be researched and reported on, while topics out of that area of interest are not given attention or appropriate research to expand the topic. As one comment raised, often null results are not reported in the research. In relation to this, I must also raise the point that most of the time, if the results obtained are not desired, the experiment is either completed again under different controls to attempt to obtain the desired results, or the research and experient is simply not published. This is biased very much in the same way as Royal and Kapila (2009) suggest that Wikipedia is biased in the topics in which participants choose to engage and provide knowledge on.
   Furthermore, I also agree with the comments regarding the need to be mindful when accessing information from Wikipedia as many participants can contribute to the knowledge base which is available from this Internet resource. However, it is almost important to note the significant points that Jensen (2012) raises regarding the monitoring of information through those behind the scenes at Wikipedia, who ensure that information is appropriate, accurate and informative regarding each specific topic area. For example, the article available on Wikipedia regarding the War of 1812 was worked on by 2400 people with 627 people writing 200, 000 words of commentary debating the text of this one article (Jensen, 2012). This shows the wide knowledge base that is provided regarding one specific topic on Wikipedia and shows the different and important knowledge that can be obtained through 'crowdsourced' knowledge. The method in which information is obtained for Wikipedia calls for the need for informed individuals to come together and share information via the Internet in order to become produsers. As Jensen (2012) notes, this calls for the encouragement of university students, such as ourselves, to step forward and participate by sharing the knowledge and information we have gained through our academics, education as well as personal experience.