Thread: Wikipedia

Don't you just hate when people say that they don't use or don't like Wikipedia because "anyone can edit it"?? Y'know, there's nobody who just goes around changing numbers and shit, if there's vandalism, you're gonna know it.[citation needed] And even then, you could just look at the bibliography of the page and find the source (since apparently some random website you find is more accurate than Wikipedia). Wikipedia is also monitored by staff, not closely, but enough. You could also ignore things with "Citation Needed" next to it.

Rant inspired by recent school project. Lame. I should have put a ton of wrong information and said I found it on one of the millions of websites they say are more accurate than Wikipedia.

1. Use Wikipedia
2. Copypaste bibliography at the bottom of the page
3. ??????????
4. Profit.

Originally Posted by Mario92

1. Use Wikipedia
2. Copypaste bibliography at the bottom of the page
3. ??????????
4. Profit.

You have just taught me how to use Wikipedia in a school project, even though it is forbidden.

Anyway, I agree. Wikipedia is usually a legit source, even though it is subjected to the possibility of being vandalized. I have only seen one or two vandalisms in the entire time frame I was on Wikipedia, so I'm pretty confident it is a good source for the most part.

Originally Posted by Jesus of Suburbia

Y'know, there's nobody who just goes around changing numbers and shit

Guarantee this happens every day. Personally I like to add the occasional "Ice Cream Man was here" to pages every once in a while. Generally changes will be reverted fairly quickly, especially when the changes are obvious vandalism, but occasionally something may sneak by if it's more subtle.

Originally Posted by Mario92

1. Use Wikipedia
2. Copypaste bibliography at the bottom of the page
3. ??????????
4. Profit.

Lawlz

Originally Posted by Mark75

Guarantee this happens every day. Personally I like to add the occasional "Ice Cream Man was here" to pages every once in a while. Generally changes will be reverted fairly quickly, especially when the changes are obvious vandalism, but occasionally something may sneak by if it's more subtle.

Maybe occasionally, but not enough to fuck up any kinds of reports or research or anything.

Originally Posted by Jesus of Suburbia

Lawlz

Also, holy balls, I just realized that it was you. Welcome back! *glomps*

Originally Posted by Mario92

Also, holy balls, I just realized that it was you. Welcome back! *glomps*

Thanks.

Wikipedia is fine for quickly finding information on a subject, but if you need to cite sources in a report, don't use Wikipedia. Because of the way it works, it simply cannot function as a legit source.

Originally Posted by Marvo

Wikipedia is fine for quickly finding information on a subject, but if you need to cite sources in a report, don't use Wikipedia. Because of the way it works, it simply cannot function as a legit source.

That really depends on the kinda report you're writing. For anything school related below College or University level, Wikipedia is likely to be a good enough source. I've actually gotten away with using it at my university too, for things not critical to the report I was writing.

Meh, Wikipedia vandalism is reverted relatively quickly. For home/personal research motives, it works almost perfectly fine. I wouldn't of expected it to be classified as a reliable research source at College or University.

I just realized that Mark edited my post, and it is hilarious.

Originally Posted by Jesus of Suburbia

I just realized that Mark edited my post, and it is hilarious.

Lol, I saw that too. Pretty funny!

What is the fourth line in your signature?

Enjoy it. Couldn't find a color that matched the other one while still evading the fog. Can't believe I forgot about text outlines... >.<

I like your avatar. That's one of my favorite advice dog spin-offs.
[Edit:] HOLY SHIT SOME FIEND HAS ADDED A LINK TO MY POST.
Ah, I'm kidding, I know it's automatic. I just felt like overreacting and then explaining that the overreaction wasn't real.

Originally Posted by Jesus of Suburbia

That's one of my favorite advice dog spin-offs.

Yeah, it's pretty funny. There are some lame ones, though. My other personal favorites are Sexually Oblivious Rhino and Socially Awkward Penguin.

Foul Bachelor Frog, ftw.

This thread is now about Anne Frank.

Musically Oblivious Eighth Grader, Technologically Impaired Duck, and the newest Family Tech Support Guy. Those are my favorites.

Originally Posted by Jesus of Suburbia

Technologically Impaired Duck