I usually uses wikipedia for my main searching of articel...but some people said about its reliability still arguing as a encyclopedia. I found another encyclopedia such wikipedia called encarta. now, could you clear my confusiousness about what should I used? and compare them both each other
2006-10-07 06:20:30 · 5 answers · asked by teza A 1 in Computers & Internet ➔ Internet
Wikipedia is written by other users-- so there is a possibility that the information is false. while sites like Encarta is done by professionals
2006-10-07 06:23:57 · answer #1 · answered by Mrsashko 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wikipedia is one of the most reliable encyclopedias online because it is constantly updated. There are many people out there whose sole job is to make sure information posted on Wikipedia is correct. Once when I was bored I added bad information to an article. It was removed within the minute.
2006-10-07 06:24:38 · answer #2 · answered by bleachagain41 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
wikipedia is not a reliable source of information. anyone that goes there has the ability to add information to this site. therefore there is no way for the average person to be sure what is there is correct.
2006-10-07 06:37:54 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i have encarta on my computer. it's better for scientific thigs, while on wikipedia you find much more articles, but not as complete as the ones from encarta.for example, if you look for a band on encarta, it usually doesn't find it, while wikipedia offers full information. but if you look for....molecule, for example, encarta has a much complete article.
i hope i helped:)
2006-10-07 06:31:50 · answer #4 · answered by powerpuffgirl_2332 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This summer, The New Yorker ran an article on the subject. Hope this helps:
2006-10-07 06:30:33 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋