Andy M.
Certified Pretend Chef
Can you rely on Wikipedia entries after reading this article?
buckytom said:like i said in another thread, it's a great resource when you're trying to explain yourself.
this sounds like a bit of a witchhunt, against wiki. most things in it's database are fairly easily recognized facts.
of course subjects that reside in or at least have grey areas can be spinned by weirdos and red sox fans, umm, sorry, redunundant.
i've found some questionable "definitions" in regards to historic events and facts/figures, but then, history is only the victor's perception.
but, for the most part, i've found it to be a very useful tool for everything from getting basic info the be able to do more research, to defining unknown terms that are so new to our culture that there's not much reliable info on them in any form.
you have to be an idiot to believe anything you read right away, anyway.
YT2095 said:I tend to use it for the bibliographies at the bottom, and then search from there, it`s a nice platform to take off from.
The two are not mutually exclusive. Many people do not know what you would consider easily recognized facts.Andy M. said:People don't look up 'fairly easily recognized facts'. They look up stuff they don't know.
GB said:The two are not mutually exclusive. Many people do not know what you would consider easily recognized facts.
Each person looks up stuff they don't know. And no one looks up stuff they already know. So they would be inclined to accept the info as accurate as it's not easily recognizeable to them. Which is why they looked it up in the first place.
andy, i look up stuff that i know a lot about, but need to get some more info on the matter to be more accurate in my use of my knowledge...