Great. Someone edited the article in the last half hour and removed the offending material. Awesome. Wikipedia is fixed. Get your info where ever you want. I don't even care any more. I'm out.

Mods, please close my thread and deduct 5,000 ATS points.

Well, I think Wikipedia does a great service to the internet and the online community in general, as well as in academic fields in real life.

It does one thing perfectly.

If someone is incapable of gathering information, incapable of winnowing fact from fiction and they rely solely on wikipedia for their entire point, argument and evidence, then I know at a glance.

Easy to work out the worthy information and who to bother to engage.

If someone is diligent enough and have done their research, be it faulty or accurate based on their ability, and they use wikipedia as a reference, I see no problem with it. If it backs up what they say, and it's not a hidden agenda on a blog with some scurrilous half witted account on wikipedia which is later revoked for inaccuracy, then why would it not be valid?

If someone simply uses wikipedia as an encyclopedia and consider it a point of reference alone, then they do themselves no favours.

I read it on wiki. Nyah! = fail.

Here is a reference, on wiki, which backs up my claim. = potential.

Being that if you are a registered user of Wikipedia, you do have the option to edit the articles, it should be more than obvious to most that any inaccurate information is either marked as possibly inaccurate or outright deleted by someone who does know.

It's not a graffiti on the wall toilet wall, you know.

If you can't find it elsewhere or if you are not able to provide other references to the information you present, then don't use wiki as the be all and end all. But it works in a pinch to help in a case if the information is evident elsewhere, and serves to condense information for such purposes.

Originally posted by g0dhims3lf
Wiki is a great place. Not only to find legitiment fact based information but societal trends and or terminology. It is a melting pot that should be used as a initial reference. Or in other words a first stop but never the last. One should always double check any information with a 2nd more credible source. It is not like they do not warn you

Wikipedia is continually created and updated, with articles on historic events appearing within minutes, rather than months or years.

Awwww HAMBURGERS. You said it !

Just before I did.. I should read threads to the end to stave off this occurring again.

lol, I'm sure I did that though... O.o

This really shouldn't be an issue at all, unless people are too lazy to make two clicks.

I use Wikipedia all the time, but I never directly use it as a source. Why? Well because Wikipedia articles that have factual information are sourced and linked...so I use the original source for the information.

It is really quite easy to do, people should try it.

Originally posted by xedocodex
This really shouldn't be an issue at all, unless people are too lazy to make two clicks.

I use Wikipedia all the time, but I never directly use it as a source. Why? Well because Wikipedia articles that have factual information are sourced and linked...so I use the original source for the information.

It is really quite easy to do, people should try it.

That is a great arguing point. If the cited sources on wiki don't stand up to scrutiny, then the author of any external post should know this.

So again, if they don't and go ahead with using faulty information, we can tell.

There is no issue with wiki at all. It's either laziness on behalf of the person using it, or on behalf of those reading information presented from it.

Originally posted by darkbake
There was a study done in England that found the error rate on Wikipedia was less than that of Encyclopedia Britannica. As far as the internet goes, that is very reliable. Seeing as we can't exactly reference books, what would you like us to reference? Fox News? MSNBC? Some random site someone found on Google?

I have the ability to access scientific journals online in some cases, but not many people do. Don't you think Wikipedia is a great source? In fact, I think more people should be using sources.

Any one willing to bet that George Soros was ALSO behind that study?

I see sites like Wikipedia as nothing more than MSM behind a stealth facade of fake credibility.

Originally posted by ZeroReady
This is the opening sentence of the section about the origins of the Arab Spring movement. One of the most important social revolutions in modern times, and some jackass wants to be funny with it.

Well for one the revolutions are NOT one of the most important social revolutions of modern times. It is just another version of the 1953 Iranian coup d'etat funded and organised by Western governments (The Iranian Coup was to stop Iran from nationalizing their oil....I hope your ignorance doesn't extend to the understanding of the meaning of nationalizing). What Iran attempted to do is precisely what Libya/Gaddaffi tried to do...Gaddaffi was organizing a new currency so AFRICA (Yes, he was on his way to uniting Africa as a whole) no longer needed to rely on the US dollar. He was also building a water facility capable of providing Libya AND SURROUNDING COUNTRIES with fresh water...Facilities that were bombed by NATO forces. This is just the tip of the iceberg. You want to learn more? Research it.

Originally posted by ZeroReady
Deny Ignorance.

Please, do so.

Someone asked a question about drones the other day. They had seen a small flying/hovering thing, in the UK. They wanted to know what was the first use of drones in the US. I told them it was much more complicated than that and pointed them to Wikipedia (without too much shame; although I did mutter a small disclaimer).

I think that was a legitimate use of Wikipedia. They didn't need excruciatingly exact factual information; just an overview of the subject. But I would never, ever (I swear on my grandmother) send someone there to read up on, oh, say, Conspiracy Theory!

I don't generally recommend Wikipedia as a source for anything other than "The Official Story." If that's all you need, that's all you need....