Wikipedia--Valuble source or rehashed/made up information?

Question

Wikipedia, what do you think.

Personally, I say anyone who thinks it's a "credible" source should drive drunk into a telephone pole.

Answer 1

Wikipedia has its good points and bad points. One should be careful to avoid taking EVERYTHING they read there as fact. Wikipedia is open source and as a result a large percentage of what you see there isn't peer reviewed.

For more information check out the source. LOL!

Answer 2

It's a little of both. If you find something inaccurate on it, and have credible sources to prove it, you can update it if you like. I've never felt compelled to do that myself though. If other readers don't have the common sense to look at the sources they cite (or the lack thereof) then that's their problem.

Answer 3

I'd say it's both. Like any source of information, Wikipedia is only as good or as credible as its contributors. Of which I'm one, and I agree that its "neutral point of view" is like "almost pregnant" or "jumbo shrimp".

Like the Internet itself, Wikipedia to a degree has to rely on its contributors and administrators to be basically truthful people and not seek to skew it to their own agendas. Which we all have, even those who actively deny them.

Answer 4

Well 2 things, dont blindly absorb whats written there, because its somones opinion on certain subject which may vary may be biased.
But its a good source of primary information, for example, if you dont know a topic you will most probably see it in wiki which is good..right

Answer 5

dont take in everything coz they give what they get and sometimes the things got may not b 2 accurate.they r covering a v.large scope & overlookings may b there.
yes,...but most things r quite perfect.

Answer 6

i think its a good source for info

Answer 7

LOL, I find it valuable and I am not drunk