I'd like to address what seems to be a recent slew of "Bad research" on ATS.
I'll say bad research, but counter that with "Good ideas", sometimes anyway. There have been a lot of recent postings on here using wikipedia as
"evidence" for an Original Post. In the areas of the web that I use, it's fairly common knowledge that wikipedia or wiki is broken
and not a decent or reliable source of information. I also move within some academic circles in the UK where, at least amongst the lecturers I know
wiki is regarded as a joke.
Anecdotally, I know of someone that failed their first year of University because they'd used wiki as their only source for their final written piece
- the lecturer that told me this was fuming at the stupidity of the student, especially as they'd driven the point home that wiki is only
(potentially) a starting place for research.
Anyway, here's a quote from Co-Founder Larry Sanger:
My lazy research link
stated that the site is no longer useful, and suffers from many problems ranging from “serious management problems, to an often dysfunctional
community, to frequently unreliable content, and to a whole series of scandals.”
Now this might be fairly old news to some of us, the article is from 2007 - but I can't see the situation on wiki to have improved, it's
user-generated content. For those that don't know... ANYONE can create an account and start editing and create articles. Myself, personally edited
the article on the place where I live to state that there was a "Unicorn farm, to protect the rural community from Goblins" - it stayed on wiki for
6 months before someone noticed/cared enough and it got removed.
I know that wiki has gotten better at spotting vandalism and deliberate errors, but the problem still persists that there are good-intentioned people,
that simply don't know their facts.
There is also the problem of long-term, dedicated vandals that are determined to ruin wikipedia, seemingly because of the hubris of those that run it.
I didn't realise, until I did some research into this that wiki is rife with in-fighting and peer vandalism.
Here's another link to show examples of the schism within wiki - WARNING PROFANITY!!!
Prior to reading this link though, be warned - PROFANITY... but just filter out those words if they offend you, because even though this article is
tongue in cheek, it does site numerous links and articles about why wiki is frudged.
MOAR LAZY RESEARCH!
To sum up, I just wanted to make (those of us that might care) a little more aware of the dangers of lazy research and the damage it can do to our
"reputations" - if they matter, but more importantly to the articles we post and the discussions surrounding them.
Edit to add: MODS, not too sure where this should be, please feel free to shift it.
Edit: Probably multiple for layout, formatting, spelling etc.
[edit on 12/5/1010 by jokei]