Is Wikipedia even worthwhile?

[Solver]

Wikipedia has to be my favorite site, discounting Apolyton and Google.

I spend lots of time reading random stuff on Wikipedia, and it is quite informative. Wikipedia has amazing breadth of subjects - obscure subjects are covered, and that's great. Next, it has a good compilation of information. It's convenient how many key facts can be found in one place instead of having to look all ver the Web.

Realiability? There are no universally reliable sources. Mistakes can be and have been found in Britannica and Encarta. If I were writing an academic paper or something of great importance, I'd never trust a single source. I would want no less than three sources on the subject.

Some mathematical, computing and linguistical subjects are covered on Wikipedia with a level of detail that would be hard to find anywhere else online. So, thumbs up!

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Ecthy
Wrong in a substantial manner? Example?

The entry on australipithecines claims, or used to claim, a) that the term is onyl used of members of the genus Australopithecus and b) that the australipithecines are not considered human ancestors.

[laurentius]

Found this on Crooks and Liars

'Kyra of CNN, had on a journalist named John Seigenthaler, who found a slanderous biography of himself posted on Wikipedia. Jimmy Wales, the Wikipedia founder came on to defend the site and explains it works.'

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/cnn_phillips_wikipedia_interview_051205a.wmv

[asleepathewheel]

look at it occassionally, really don't take it seriously or much that I read on it, but an ok first step, with a grain of salt. certainly don't take seriously someone linking to a wiki article.

[Cyclotron]

It's all lies, I tell you

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Cyclotron

I'm quite unimpressed with the view held by some that, because wikipedia isn't perfect, it's worthless or dangerous.

But it IS dangerous -- if you use Wikipedia, you support terrorism.

[Winston]

I bet there's already a Wikipedia article on MrFun - world's greatest humorist.

[Elok]

You mock, but really, there is. Whoa...

[Barnabas]

the penis still remains, I thought mods would have deleted the pic by now


I agree with Solver

"I spend lots of time reading random stuff on Wikipedia, and it is quite informative. Wikipedia has amazing breadth of subjects - obscure subjects are covered, and that's great."

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Cyclotron
It's all lies, I tell you

I thought CFC had more users these days.

[Traianvs]

Wikipedia owns... Just recently I had to look for some geographical info about a certain place in Italy for a paper, and Wikipedia could provide me with some good info and some links too that I would otherwise have missed!
I wouldn't know where to look for that info elsewhere, and if I had to search our library for specific books on Italian geography I'd lose a huge amount of time that could be spent on other more important things

so for me Wikipedia is useful

[Dis]

Originally posted by Brachy-Pride
the penis still remains, I thought mods would have deleted the pic by now


I agree with Solver

"I spend lots of time reading random stuff on Wikipedia, and it is quite informative. Wikipedia has amazing breadth of subjects - obscure subjects are covered, and that's great."

If that would have been a woman with her penis out, this thread would have been closed immediately. Double standards I tell you.

[Elok]

Ming's just busy looming ominously over Philosophiser in the "Jews and Protestants" thread.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Dis


If that would have been a woman with her penis out, this thread would have been closed immediately. Double standards I tell you.

I hope so

JM

[Q Classic]

While Wikipedia is not always worthwhile, it's almost never worthless.

Indeed, it does manage to gather a substantial amount of information into a single point source--quite an accomplishment.

It's decent enough for a small overview, to give you an idea of what to continue to research in other, more accurate texts.

Then again, complaining that Wikipedia might not be accurate is like complaining that the mass media--FoxNews included-isn't either.

Everybody ought to know that already--and if you didn't, then you're an ignorant twit.