Wikipedia....

Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by SIUC4, Mar 30, 2010.

  1. SIUC4

    SIUC4 Glockness

    Messages:
    792
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Location:
    Houston
    If there is a thread on this already, there needs to be a new one.
    Wikipedia MAY at times have some details that are correct. There are however many, many, many topics on wikipedia that are 100 percent false. When trying to give a reference on a topic in a thread for others to read, wikipedia is not the route to go.



    /rant/
     
  2. GreyEclipse

    GreyEclipse TheGreyEclipse

    Messages:
    1,924
    Likes Received:
    9
    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2010
    Location:
    GA&WY
    I find that it it's usually a good source if you have good enough common sense to tell what's fact and what's junk, lol.
     

  3. arclight610

    arclight610

    Messages:
    3,038
    Likes Received:
    4
    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2009
    I like the idea of Wikipedia, a collective of human knowledge.
     
  4. SIUC4

    SIUC4 Glockness

    Messages:
    792
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Location:
    Houston
    Thats the problem, some people do not have that sense and will read into and believe anything they see...In several of my college classes if Wikipedia was in a citation page it was an automatic 0.
     
  5. harlenm

    harlenm Millennium Member

    Messages:
    9,974
    Likes Received:
    1,094
    Joined:
    Jul 20, 1999
    Location:
    CT
    I remember reading a study that said the accuracy of wikipedia was within 2% of encyclopedias.
     
  6. Easterbrook

    Easterbrook Wagon Burner

    Messages:
    9,369
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2007
    Location:
    In my teepee.
    I think it's decently accurate, and is a great reference tool for background information on a topic.

    However, I hate some of the bent they have: like they have an article Homelessness in the United States. To read that article you'd think the USA was the biggest crap-hole in the world.

    Interestingly, they don't have articles on homelessness in Haiti, Somalia, or Zimbabwe. Those countries must have their **** together to not have homelessness.
     
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2010
  7. Faulkner

    Faulkner Patriot Millennium Member

    Messages:
    1,725
    Likes Received:
    55
    Joined:
    Aug 21, 1999
    Location:
    Arkansas Ozarks

    My first thought was, who cares?
     
  8. Brian Lee

    Brian Lee Drop those nuts

    Messages:
    9,539
    Likes Received:
    436
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2008
    Location:
    Up a tree.
    At least Wiki has the potential for it's inaccuracies to be corrected over time because it all comes under world wide peer review. Just because something was published in an encyclopedia by a major publisher does not mean that the authors really knew their stuff. And if they didn't, there's no chance it's going to be corrected any time soon.

    I heard Glen Beck slamming Wiki once, but from the way he spoke about it, it was obvious that he had no idea how the "peer review and change" process worked. In fact, Glen Beck is a perfect example of a guy who's opinions are published by a major media outlet, even though many of his statements could use some correction through Wiki-style peer review, from people who know the subjects better than Glen does. Glen illustrates why large scale peer review (which Wiki gets) eventually results in better published information than you'd ever get when one guy throws his opinion out there and nobody gets to add anything or correct errors.

    Who says the published authors/commentators "really know it all" as well as they think they do? Brittney Spears is widely published, but is she really the best musician/singer out there? What a joke that is.:whistling:
     
  9. Goaltender66

    Goaltender66 NRA GoldenEagle

    Messages:
    5,169
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2000
    Location:
    Under the cultural penumbra of DC
    It's great if you need recaps of movie plots or television shows.

    As a scholarly work, it stinks.
     
  10. hoffy

    hoffy

    Messages:
    1,274
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Location:
    Ohio
    like someone said, a starting point. No way am I buying 2% inaccuracy. If you use it as a source in college, I pity you. Saw a graduate student nearly cry when proff went off on her. Would have been funny if not for the ten minute diatribe about what a peer reviewed journal was and some other renegade defended wiki as reviewed and the situation went down hill from there.:rofl: The proff could tell by my expression how I felt but since I was in the front row I was trapped while he went off(not a quiet guy):faint:
     
  11. NorthCarolinaLiberty

    NorthCarolinaLiberty MentalDefective

    Messages:
    5,145
    Likes Received:
    4
    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2009
    Location:
    Tax Funded Mental Institution
    Hmmm, I was certain Montana was the fourth largest state, not Arizona.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona#Geography

    Geography</SPAN>


    Arizona is located in the western United States as one of the Four Corners states. Arizona is the fourth largest state in area, after Nevada and before Montana. Of the state's 113,998 square miles (295,000 km2), approximately 15% is privately owned. The remaining area is public forest and park land, state trust land and Native American reservations.
     
  12. boozer

    boozer

    Messages:
    1,951
    Likes Received:
    126
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Location:
    Hilltop, USA
    Most Wiki articles have footnotes, I often follow them to read the source material.

    Most of the time it is distilled fairly well.

    I hate it when someone cites a Wiki article in an exchange, and the reply is "Wikipedia is all falsehood" with no counter argument. I guess if you can't dispute the facts, denounce the source.
     
  13. jtmac

    jtmac Señor Member

    Messages:
    5,395
    Likes Received:
    187
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2005
    Location:
    State of Denial
    Wikipedia is one of the most phenomenal reference tools available, and is one of my first research points on any subject.

    HOWEVER, anyone citing Wikipedia as a solid reference is an idiot.
    LIKEWISE, anyone criticizing Wikipedia because some idiots cites it is also an idiot.

    Wikipedia articles have a section at the bottom for references. Use them.
     
  14. SIUC4

    SIUC4 Glockness

    Messages:
    792
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Location:
    Houston
    ALSO anyone saying wikipedia is a phenomenal reference tool is an idiot.
     
  15. the iceman

    the iceman Proud Veteran CLM

    Messages:
    7,741
    Likes Received:
    10
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    Northern Illinois
    Regardless of anyone's opinion, I really enjoy reading stuff on Wikipedia.
     
  16. RonS

    RonS Millennium Member

    Messages:
    15,413
    Likes Received:
    6,135
    Joined:
    May 27, 1999
    Location:
    Oh, USA
    I can spend hours clicking the Random Article link.

    Wikipedia is a great tool, you can catch a quick, informal overview of a topic and if it is interesting use the refrences at the bottom to research it. I have never "cited" Wikipedia because I never know from one day to the next if Eric requires APA or CMS, but if an article seems like something other posters might be interested in I will link to it.

    I find that most people who use Wikipedia are somewhat less credulous than those who are convinced that it is published by a guy in a red suit from the nether regions. No source is fool proof. Trust no one. Those who put their faith in "established, peer reviewed sources" can be fooled too.
     
  17. GreyEclipse

    GreyEclipse TheGreyEclipse

    Messages:
    1,924
    Likes Received:
    9
    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2010
    Location:
    GA&WY
    I agree. :dunno:
     
  18. boozer

    boozer

    Messages:
    1,951
    Likes Received:
    126
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Location:
    Hilltop, USA
    OK, SIUC4, since we're all idiots, which articles are false.

    I understand historical articles are written with a slant, but when I want to know when Churchill died, I know where to look quickly. Are they lying about that, too?
     
  19. hamster

    hamster NRA Life Member

    Messages:
    3,166
    Likes Received:
    29
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    For a doctoral thesis, Wikipedia isn't good enough. For grabbing a quick reference for a fact on a casual internet discussion I think it is good enough. If some quoted fact is incorrect, you are more than welcome to do the research and correct the poster.

    I for one don't have time to do in-depth research on every inane topic discussed here.

    PS. Everyone with more than a 4th grade education knows that no single source is considered to be completely reliable. When someone quotes Wikipedia here, I think it is a GIVEN that we take it with a grain of salt.
     
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2010
  20. nmk

    nmk

    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    871
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    And why is that? What do you think its value is?