Wikipedia

[The Top Crusader]

I use Wikipedia quite often, but never for anything important (though its hardly as if I do anything important, anyway ). I'll just use it for info on a movie or game or random people or TV shows I am interested in at that particular moment. It seems to be reasonably accurate, and like I said, I'm not using it for anything important so if it is not accurate it really doesn't matter.

[Oba-rai]

I use Wikipedia for general knowledge-attaining; their psychology articles and articles about anime and such are good. Game information and whatnot are valid from Wikipedia too. If I'm researching something quickly for school (or, if I can't understand it to begin with) then I'll check wikipedia, because just remember: there may be a lot of people putting false information in there, but there's an expansive amount of people who edit it quickly out. Massive recent changes patrol people from all over the world. As far as faulty information on well-known things goes, you're almost pretty much trial-by-error-safe...

[Rodney Rathbone]

Hey I'm going to have to check out this Wikipedia thing so I can edit some FACTS into articles!

[Rachel Maxwell]

I generally trust it. I figure, if nobody's edited it out yet, it's gotta be (fairly) close to being right. But I don't use it for reports or anything.

[Dakota Bud]

What is Wikipedia???

[Catspaw]

It's a website that has lots of different information that regular people can edit. It's kind of like an encyclopedia that isn't quite as academic. You can check it out at www.wikipedia.comif you want to!

[Dakota Bud]

Ooooo I've used it

[Movieman]

With Wikipedia, you get to read a lot of the interesting facts about things that other encyclopedias wouldn't usually include on their websites.

[KODY 105]

My dad says that if anyone can edit it, then they probably have, and have filled it with potentially incorrect information. I use it to get a general description of a term, but not as an absolute reference.

[SivartM]

I found vandalism on Wikipedia once and edited it out. I think the page was about Clementines, the citrus fruits.

[Lord Sesshoumaru]

I seen a great video on youtube about wikipedia. if anyone is interested in it it's in my favs section (lord Vulcan)

Lord Sesshoumaru

[King Butter Turtle]

I don't mean to offend anyone, but your all wrong! I can't stand people who don't like wikipedia. It is by far the most reliable source in the entire world. How could it not be, it has 6.7 billion editers. Of course it is only theoretical, but I've been using it for as long as I've been using the internet and to this day have never once found a piece of information from wikipedia to be wrong. Never, and I use it probably four times as much as the ToO, so that's saying something.

I must admit that I wouldn't use it on a very important paper or essay, but that's not at all because anyone can edit it. In that important of papers an encyclopedia is not a very respectable source and you have to know who's information you're using, (unfortunatly wikipedia can only trace information back to an IP address) but neither of those reasons make it unrelieable.

There are two things that I think you non-believers should check out. One is the WikiScanner, a site that essentially tells you where all the information on wikipedia came from. The second is the Bering Straight School District. It's a district in Alaska that teaches their students from a wiki curriculum. It's basically their own wikipedia that anyone can edit (students, teachers, administraters, you or I) that they teach their students from.

[StrongNChrist]

I didn't like Wikipedia that much, due to a youtube thing I saw, but when I used it recently I found out it was correct.

[King Butter Turtle]

I didn't like Wikipedia that much, due to a youtube thing I saw, but when I used it recently I found out it was correct.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4530930.stm

[KristopherWindsor]

I hit WP almost everyday to look up acronyms, words, people, etc.

[Peachey Keen]

I love Wikipedia!I go there every time I'm online.It's not alway's right but I find lots of info there and have an account too.

[Clodius Albinus]

It is by far the most reliable source in the entire world.

Really? I should trust it over, say, academic journals? University press books? Studies conducted by leading researchers or sponsored by highly reputable organizations? Are you sure?

How could it not be, it has 6.7 billion editers.

One doubts, of course, that every man, woman, and child alive, regardless of age, access to a computer, or English literacy (Wikipedia exists in many other languages, but it's basically a one-way flow of information; rarely is material written in, say, Farsi, translated and added to the English language article), edits Wikipedia. But perhaps more importantly, the idea that making everyone an editor ensures accuracy is specious at best. The analogy is not perfect, but if you had a severe medical condition, would you rather trust your diagnosis to five doctors or one hundred members of your community at large?

Ideally, of course, the five doctors within that larger group would assert their credentials and get everyone else to line up behind them. They would also care more about the issue, and be more likely to assert themselves. The same happens on Wikipedia. But this suggests that at best, those other "ninety-five" can be overcome, not that they increase accuracy and reliability.

Of course it is only theoretical, but I've been using it for as long as I've been using the internet and to this day have never once found a piece of information from wikipedia to be wrong.

Perhaps because you just assumed it all to be right. I've seen plenty of egregious errors on Wikipedia -- some on controversial issues, but quite a few simply blunders and misunderstandings on issues where there is no dispute. Any reference will have mistakes, and that's no reason to reject Wikipedia, which I find to be a very useful tool, but it would be very naive to presume that Wikipedia is always correct.

[Selah]

Eh...I use it. Like Darcie said, it's good if you just want to understand the basic idea of something.


Btw, have you ever played 'Six Degrees' on wiki? Where you have to get to Hitler in 6 or less clicks?

[King Butter Turtle]

Eh...I use it. Like Darcie said, it's good if you just want to understand the basic idea of something.


Btw, have you ever played 'Six Degrees' on wiki? Where you have to get to Hitler in 6 or less clicks?

I have heard of that concept, but I've never made a game of it. Interesting page to try to find.

*runs off to wikipedia*

[Selah]

Eh...I use it. Like Darcie said, it's good if you just want to understand the basic idea of something.


Btw, have you ever played 'Six Degrees' on wiki? Where you have to get to Hitler in 6 or less clicks?

I have heard of that concept, but I've never made a game of it. Interesting page to try to find.

*runs off to wikipedia*

Haha. You start by clicking "random article".