Skip to main content

Online Content Resources Aside from Wikipedia

Alternatives to Wikipedia.

Wikipedia is not the online source of information online.

There are many instances when writers and websites alike prefer references other than a rather generic Wikipedia page. To be clear, we are taking nothing away from this massively useful (and completely free) online resource. The primary issue is that as this portal contains user-contributed subjects, there have been times when its accuracy has been called into question. Additionally, using a discrete authoritative reference is much more beneficial in terms of SEO and exposure when compared to a broad Wikipedia hyperlink. The main concern, therefore, involves what other resources are available and the benefits that these hubs have to offer.


As the name may already suggest, this is the go-to site if you are looking for a variety of confirmed statistics from industry-recognised sources. A handy search field at the top of its home page will provide quick results and in the majority of cases, the information is quite recent. While this is an excellent portal to employ, please keep in mind that accessing in-depth studies offered by Statistica will occasionally require a subscription or a one-time payment.


HubSpot is a provider of enterprise-level online marketing and CRM software. However, their blog provides insight in regards to many of the latest SEO-related topics as well as a host of expert opinions. One of the best features of HubSpot is that their observations are normally hyperlinked out to authoritative websites. So, you will be able to confirm these sources with the simple click of a button.

To be fair, is somewhat of a dark horse when it comes to outsourcing quality content. The main takeaway point here is that this website is not necessarily meant to be used as a direct reference. It is rather able to provide a general overview of a specific topic before further research takes place.

This massive portal is another reliable wellspring of online content and it provides users with immediate access to well over 200,000 entries associated with a variety of topics. The key difference between and Wikipedia is the fact that all data is obtained from verified sources such as Columbia Encyclopedia and Oxford University Press. In other words, the chances that any data is inaccurate are remote at best. Categories include history, literature, social sciences and religion.


Yes…you guessed it. Wikipedia is a distant cousin to what can only be called a virtual clone which has graduated from university. The main advantage of Scholarpedia is that all contributors are first vetted in regards to their knowledge and experience. However, its pages employ the very same MediaWiki software and outbound links are generally included at the bottom of each article.

Sourcing reliable and up-to-date information can be difficult at times, particularly when we keep in mind that nearly anyone can appear as if they are an industry expert. These online portals are all viable options to Wikipedia and each offers its own set of benefits.

No comments available

You have a question or a comment on the article? Share it with us!

Your email address will not be published.


Managed Service

Textbroker offers an extended level of service with the Managed Service option. Managed Service gives you additional support and a personal account manager when you want us to manage your projects for you. Find out more here.

Request a customised offer


Do you need up-to-date content? Then manage your project through Textbroker’s Self-Service. You choose the quality level, price, and author for your content.

Register for free!


Thousands of authors from around the globe earn money with Textbroker, the leading provider of unique, custom content. Become a Textbroker author now and access thousands of projects to choose from.

Register for free!