posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 02:33 PM
On Wikipedia it doesn't matter about the truth too much, what matters is what 'notable' sources have to say about it. If those notable sources are
telling the truth that is just a bonus. I think in this regard they are kind of right, because in a lot of areas there is no truth (an example
exception being something like 2+2=4 (although I bet someone will try and argue that)), only what the notable people say is the truth.
For the most part when Wikipedia is wrong, or does something wrong it is actually our fault, because it's written by the people.
There are some exceptions for this though, that are getting worse as time goes on, like businesses or other entities editing it for their own gain.
There is also another side, and that is the 'cabal', essentially a loosely based group who control the wikipedia in many ways. For example if you
or I send in 50 people to win a vote somewhere, then that will be seen as bad, however the cabal do this all the time, through their IRC chatrooms and
other tools. The way they would get away with this, is because they are all known admins/editors, we couldn't get away with that, because they will
refuse to count the votes because they come from anonymous/new users. The cabal also are masters at wiki-lawyering, basically (ab)using the policies
to stop people they disagree with, however if you or I wiki-lawyer, they will not allow that. The cabal get away with a lot of double standards like
It's things like this that cause people to label Wikipedia "The largest online role playing game"
All that said, Wikipedia is very useful, and often does have good information, I just make sure it is never my only source.