  The Internet-based encyclopaedia Wikipedia has grown to become one of the
most visited web-sites on the Internet. However, critics have questioned the
quality of entries, and an empirical study has shown Wikipedia to contain
errors in a 2005 sample of science entries. Biased coverage and lack of sources
are among the "Wikipedia risks". The present work describes a simple assessment
of these aspects by examining the outbound links from Wikipedia articles to
articles in scientific journals with a comparison against journal statistics
from Journal Citation Reports such as impact factors. The results show an
increasing use of structured citation markup and good agreement with the
citation pattern seen in the scientific literature though with a slight
tendency to cite articles in high-impact journals such as Nature and Science.
These results increase confidence in Wikipedia as an good information organizer
for science in general.
