Page 1 of 1
Is Wikipedia A Useful Resource?
#2
Posted 16 September 2008 - 08:42 PM
Well they have reason to be afraid of it sometimes There are times when I've looked up something and knew that the information was wrong. But really its very rare and usually obvious when something is
#3
Posted 16 September 2008 - 09:45 PM
I've found some errors, pretty subtle ones too (check out the definition of natural selection. . . that's how people perceive it to work, but it's not quite right as stated; it also differs from 19 of 20 definitions returned by a google definition search, and that given in a textbook on evolution), but yeah, I think on the whole it's fairly reliable. I notice the mesoamerican archaeology/anthropology pages are particularly well done, apparently by an effort to coordinate work on that section. I think it's things like this, truly interested people working together to build a resource, that make it more reliable that many other internet resources (particularly those written by a single person with poor or incomplete understanding of the topic).
Obviously if you're doing serious research it should only be a starting point, just like any other encyclopedia -- I tend to use it to find terms I didn't already know, or interesting facts to verify -- but for a casual user the errors aren't a big deal.
And because of the nature of Wikipedia there are a lot of topics that wouldn't be covered by most normal encyclopedic resources (popular culture, for example). I couldn't care less about these things most of the time, but it's nice to have a place where the uninitiated can actually find information (web searches suck if you don't have a clue ).
Obviously if you're doing serious research it should only be a starting point, just like any other encyclopedia -- I tend to use it to find terms I didn't already know, or interesting facts to verify -- but for a casual user the errors aren't a big deal.
And because of the nature of Wikipedia there are a lot of topics that wouldn't be covered by most normal encyclopedic resources (popular culture, for example). I couldn't care less about these things most of the time, but it's nice to have a place where the uninitiated can actually find information (web searches suck if you don't have a clue ).
#5
Posted 17 September 2008 - 10:08 PM
It's my personal opinion that after you get past all the jerks who mess things up just for the hell of it that wikipedia is one of the best resources for information available. As opposed to a book written by a single human, and, therefore, biased being, you have articles which are edited by hundreds of people constantly. In this way, when multiple opinions and biases are presented, it becomes a simple matter to deduce plain, logical fact. Since it is impossible to present information without bias, the best way to seek the truth is to digest as many biases as possible and find the facts by the wonderful process of elimination.
This parallels my thinking on government. I believe that the single reason the United States and other governments function is because there are so many people involved in policy and decision making that no one party's personal agenda can effectively be pursued more than another's. It's not that people aren't corrupt, it's that they're all corrupt towards different things, and their conflicting agendas conflict to the point that it's nearly impossible to make a grab for power.
ADDITION!
I once argued this point with my history teacher. He conceded my point about truth, but still marked me down a letter grade for using wikipedia as a source.
This parallels my thinking on government. I believe that the single reason the United States and other governments function is because there are so many people involved in policy and decision making that no one party's personal agenda can effectively be pursued more than another's. It's not that people aren't corrupt, it's that they're all corrupt towards different things, and their conflicting agendas conflict to the point that it's nearly impossible to make a grab for power.
ADDITION!
I once argued this point with my history teacher. He conceded my point about truth, but still marked me down a letter grade for using wikipedia as a source.
#6
Posted 04 October 2008 - 07:17 AM
Wikipedia is like a part of me now. It is like my right hand or something. Love it. I feel it better be regulated though, lest it becomes a hive mind...
Unless... it already has?
Yeah, they were engineered to be like that. A chap called Montesquieu invented the idea.
Unless... it already has?
QUOTE (Mase @ Sep 18 2008, 08:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This parallels my thinking on government. I believe that the single reason the United States and other governments function is because there are so many people involved in policy and decision making that no one party's personal agenda can effectively be pursued more than another's. It's not that people aren't corrupt, it's that they're all corrupt towards different things, and their conflicting agendas conflict to the point that it's nearly impossible to make a grab for power.
Yeah, they were engineered to be like that. A chap called Montesquieu invented the idea.
I have trademarked the symbol: '™'. You fail at display names.
^ Thanks to Nazy for the... thingy ^
Things which you should look at:
SKoA - http://skoa.cspacezone.com/ , if you have any Age of Empires games.
The DS Garden Festival Minigame - Link , whether you play DStorm or not.
The Most Mysterious SSSS - Link For people who don't care about...things.
Like LEGO? Play Blockland!
^ Thanks to Nazy for the... thingy ^
Things which you should look at:
SKoA - http://skoa.cspacezone.com/ , if you have any Age of Empires games.
The DS Garden Festival Minigame - Link , whether you play DStorm or not.
The Most Mysterious SSSS - Link For people who don't care about...things.
Like LEGO? Play Blockland!
I may be an Arbiter, but I'll always be a SeeDy little man.™™
#8
Posted 04 October 2008 - 01:58 PM
QUOTE (-Jordan @ Oct 4 2008, 08:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Hell yeah.
Easy, free, quick homework.
Easy, free, quick homework.
That's exactly why teachers in my school hate it- often the guys copy & paste the info onto MS Word and print it out. Some people don't even take out the [edit] tags, ffs.
But, still, yes, Wikipedia is a useful resource, and as Charlie said, mistakes or vandalisms are often obvious.
(wyv btw)
#9
Posted 04 October 2008 - 05:20 PM
QUOTE (Wyvern.EXE @ Oct 4 2008, 09:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE (-Jordan @ Oct 4 2008, 08:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Hell yeah.
Easy, free, quick homework.
Easy, free, quick homework.
That's exactly why teachers in my school hate it- often the guys copy & paste the info onto MS Word and print it out. Some people don't even take out the [edit] tags, ffs.
But, still, yes, Wikipedia is a useful resource, and as Charlie said, mistakes or vandalisms are often obvious.
Thats how I did my auto tech class paper lol.
Yeah, I like wiki
Page 1 of 1