Trent 0 #1 April 27, 2006 Look, I know most of us here are eager to "prove" those who disagree with us wrong, and it's great that some do the research to back up what they're saying. HOWEVER, constantly using Wikipedia, especially when "proving" something about a controversial subject, is a little misleading and not necessarily "proving" anything. Just to let you all know, ANYONE can edit Wikipedia articles at ANYTIME. Think that this doesn't discredit what is posted there on controversial subjects? Go look up something remotely controversial, then look at the discussion page for it to see how people are constantly editing and cleaning the articles to reflect their opinions. ( eg. Karl Rove) Just wanted to make sure that we all know that Wikipedia is nowhere close to the end-all, be-all of knowledge that some people seem to make of it here.Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #2 April 27, 2006 Agreed. Wikipedia is a nice beginning resource, but the universal-edit feature definitely compromises its reliability IMO. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #3 April 27, 2006 >that Wikipedia is nowhere close to the end-all, be-all of knowledge >that some people seem to make of it here. Definitely true. It's about as accurate as, say, the Encyclopedia Britannica, but nowhere near 100% accurate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crwtom 0 #4 April 27, 2006 link ******************************************************************* Fear causes hesitation, and hesitation will cause your worst fears to come true Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #5 April 27, 2006 QuoteWikipedia is a nice beginning resource, but the universal-edit feature definitely compromises its reliability IMO. Yeah... Open source data will never give a reliable product....Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trent 0 #6 April 27, 2006 For those that disagree with my little "warning" about using Wiki on controversial subjects... You'd be better off using the REFERENCES at the bottoms of the entries to prove your point instead of the article itself... which changes on a daily basis for any number of reasons. In my opinion, it's just better form. Also I wanted to make sure that people knew what was up because I'm pretty sure that most folks don't go check the "discussion" and "edit history" tabs to see just how much back and forth goes on about some of these articles. Edit to Add: Also, remember I'm talking about controversial subjects on Wikipedia (politics, global happenings, etc), no scientific articles like compared in the Nature article posted. And as for people not really caring how they back up their arguments on DZ.com... well then why bother arguing about it in the first place? Honest debate is honest debate... here, or anywhere.Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #7 April 27, 2006 I often use Wikipedia as a starting point for school research... but I realize that it is not necessarily 100% accurate... And actually, I realize that most resources are likely not 100% accurate, so I get my information from many different sources. But when arguing a point on dz.com??? Hmm, well, I'm not out to get a good grade or to save the world through this website, so I honestly don't care too much about what I use to 'prove' whatever silly point I'm trying to prove on here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #8 April 27, 2006 QuoteI often use Wikipedia as a starting point for school research... but I realize that it is not necessarily 100% accurate... And actually, I realize that most resources are likely not 100% accurate, so I get my information from many different sources. But when arguing a point on dz.com??? Hmm, well, I'm not out to get a good grade or to save the world through this website, so I honestly don't care too much about what I use to 'prove' whatever silly point I'm trying to prove on here. I KNEW it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #9 April 27, 2006 QuoteAnd as for people not really caring how they back up their arguments on DZ.com... well then why bother arguing about it in the first place? Honest debate is honest debate... here, or anywhere BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Does that mean you guys will not be using NewsMax and Fox NEws any more??? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trent 0 #10 April 27, 2006 QuoteBWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Does that mean you guys will not be using NewsMax and Fox NEws any more??? Most of my news articles posted come from CNN. So who are you referring to as "you guys"? At least I can't go in and edit an article from CNN, Fox, or NewsMax just before posting it. And since you may have missed it, I never said Wiki was inaccurate... just that people should be careful when using their articles on more controversial subjects as backup for their point. ALTERNATE REPLY: Okay "US guys" will stop using Fox and NewsMax when you stop using "Conspiracy Quarterly" as your source.Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #11 April 27, 2006 QuoteALTERNATE REPLY: Okay "US guys" will stop using Fox and NewsMax when you stop using "Conspiracy Quarterly" as your source. Sorry but I have never been to the website.... BUT I did have a certain amount of history in my education and the parallels are there.. and it seems far too many on the right have not learned those lessons and are dooming us to repeat the mistakes of the past. Of course... when doing any form of critical thinking you have to get your news and information from a diverse set of sources.. using Newsmax and Fox.. as the only approved news souces certainly negates that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trent 0 #12 April 27, 2006 QuoteOf course... when doing any form of critical thinking you have to get your news and information from a diverse set of sources.. using Newsmax and Fox.. as the only approved news souces certainly negates that. Well then, good for me since I rarely if ever use those 2 sites for articles. What sites would you recommend people use to back up what they say? Just so we know...Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #13 April 27, 2006 QuoteQuoteOf course... when doing any form of critical thinking you have to get your news and information from a diverse set of sources.. using Newsmax and Fox.. as the only approved news souces certainly negates that. Well then, good for me since I rarely if ever use those 2 sites for articles. What sites would you recommend people use to back up what they say? Just so we know... Try this one. http://www.airamericaradio.com/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #14 April 27, 2006 Gad that is just as bad as listening to Lush RimBarf... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #15 April 27, 2006 I've found Wikipedia is good for fact finding with general technical/scientific issues, but if you try to look up a person or a corporation, you may be asking for trouble. For example, I just discovered I build airplanes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #16 April 27, 2006 QuoteI've found Wikipedia is good for fact finding with general technical/scientific issues, but if you try to look up a person or a corporation, you may be asking for trouble. For example, I just discovered I build airplanes. Oh. I discovered that you were a comic book writer. Maybe that was a different Ryan... But Wikipedia is still fun for finding "facts". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
