Tagging Information

Do we trust information less when we see it's limitations? Do we always expect the information we work with to be completely correct and definitive?

For example, since the beginning of Wikipedia, there has been incessant questions about the validity and value of the information it contains. If anyone can edit it, how can we trust it? While there of course have been stories of vandalism and abuse, overall, time after time, Wikipedia has shown its value as a source of information.

But how how has our valuing of it changed since they have started to insert warning labels in the articles? Do we trust it less overall because we see things like this inserted into articles:
 

or what about this:

I would argue that in fact we should trust sources more that are willing to display their limitations and concerns in public. We're beginning to understand that knowledge is a thing that evolves and improves over time. It is not static. There is not a pinnacle of knowledge that is best and after it has been reached, it simply cannot be improved. Knowledge is in fact a dynamic, changing environment that is interconnected. Making more complete sense inside the context of related information is why this warning article is also found on Wikipedia:
  

Knowledge that has been orphaned cannot be found or placed in any context. We don't know how it relates to other things we know or to other sources of information.

I think that understanding the limitations and imperfections of the information they are dealing with is a high level, critical thinking skill that is one of the essential skills that students need. This is why I'm wondering about having students tag information they use in the classroom in a similar way. What if:

1.) Students critique each other's work, using these types of warning labels on them, giving a starting point for revising?

2.) Students tag the information they find online with these warning labels, helping them see gaps in the information they have located for a project, helping them to see where they need more.

And what if…

3.) Students evaluate their textbooks in these ways? I wonder what they would find? What would be the gaps and holes they would locate?

I think we need to invent an entire new class of these warning labels that students can use in class to tag the information sources they use. What if we give them labels like these three I've made up as starting points:

I'm sure they could come up with many more of their own. What dangers and limitations would they find in the "official channels" of things such as textbooks? Or is that too dangerous to do? Would we really want to know about what they find?

I'm sure they could come up with many others as a class to use throughout the year.