|
I like wikipedia for just looking up general information, but I usually take it with a grain of salt because a lot of the stuff written there can't be verified (meaning they don't cite their sources, so that someone who wants to check up on the information can't find out where they got that info from, which is a big no-no in academic studies/research. If you don't cite sources, how do they know you didn't pull those facts/information out of your ass?). Of course, this is slowly being corrected (notice a lot of pages will now have "Citation needed", meaning if something is said on a wiki page, then you need to back it up with where you got that information from), so I think a few more years and wiki will be reliable. But for now it could be misleading, and could give people the wrong ideas about stuff.
|
I just think that
everything should be taken with a grain of salt, not just wikipedia. Because in all reality, how can you ever tell the difference between actual facts and bullshit? Anybody can cite a source, but where did
that source get
their information? It could go on continuously and at some point down the line how would you know someone's ass wasn't involved? But I admit defeat merely because wikipedia actually allows that editing insanity to go on. That in itself does reduce their credibility.
There's nowhere I can't reach.
85242
35212
taiga,