Larry Oji, Super Moderator, Judge, "Dirge for the Follin" Project Director, VG Frequency Creator
Member 4664
Level 1.21
Apr 2006
|
Apr 5, 2006, 03:46 AM
Local time: Apr 5, 2006, 02:46 AM
|
#1 of 26
|
Wikipedia is a great source for casual interest, finding off-beat topics that Brittanica doesn't cover, and even doing very broad research. As for scholarly works, Wikipedia doesn't come close to being a valid source - especially if the research is anything above the high school level.
The information on Wikipedia is no doubt thorough. It wouldn't be surprising if specialists were patrolling and editing various topics, but because of the fact that anybody can write, edit, and create entries, it leaves much room for tampering and lowers the level of authority - a huge necessity for scholarly work. Basic research for personal interest is probably the best use of Wikipedia.
Jam it back in, in the dark.
|
Similar Threads
DML