Wikipedia as an authoritative source... |
Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )
Welcome to ThoughtVent, a free community where you can talk to your peers about whatever you want. Using the site is easy and fun. Once registered, simply click on the category that fits your topic and click on the New Topic button to start talking with our other members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.
Click here to Register!
 ·
 ·
 ·
 ·
 ·
 ·
 ·
 ·
 ·
 ·
 ·
 ·
 |
  |
Wikipedia as an authoritative source... |
 Jun 4 2008, 08:01 AM
Post
#1
|
|
 Who's your Daddy?  Group: Moderator Posts: 1,986 Joined: 13-August 07 From: Tampa Bay Area, Florida, USA Member No.: 11  |
-------------------- I know you think you understand what you thought I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant!  |
 |
 
|
|
Jun 4 2008, 10:46 AM
Post
#2
|
|
 Vented Out Group: Administrators Posts: 1,360 Joined: 10-August 07 From: USA Member No.: 8 |
No scholar ever cites wikipedia as a source. Entries written by many different hands, and updated willy-nilly, often contain self-contradictions and are not really peer-reviewed enough to be considered authoritive.
Cheers, Z -------------------- Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one should be silent.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 4 2008, 01:42 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Who's your Daddy? Group: Moderator Posts: 1,986 Joined: 13-August 07 From: Tampa Bay Area, Florida, USA Member No.: 11 |
Yes, that's what I've been gathering.
It's a shame, too, because the concept seems great. -------------------- I know you think you understand what you thought I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant! |
|
|
|
|
Jun 4 2008, 03:34 PM
Post
#4
|
|
 Venting Addict Group: Members Posts: 617 Joined: 8-November 07 From: England Member No.: 216 |
Yes, far too many politically motivated entries as well.
--------------------  Snana, the friendly Sioux. |
|
|
|
|
| Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 28th August 2008 - 01:36 PM |
