Seriously? Why? It's not all that accurate, but kids and morons act as if it's the gospel, the god's truth. Doesn't anyone else question the validity of a "encyclopedia that anyone can edit"? How stuipid is this? Any moron can go there and make up stuff. In fact, I think I'm going to do that right now. I'm going to re-wright history so that it's more befitting Alvis, my lord.
2006-12-08 10:55:35 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Computers & Internet ➔ Internet
Maybe I'll start by re-wrighting the Revolutionary War and World War II, then go re-wright the history of Mormonism.
2006-12-08 10:58:08 · update #1
kt_rox100, I like you. So far, you're the most reasonable person. And Alvis is the holliest man who ever slapped iron. He killed for your sins! Praise Alvis, dammit!
2006-12-08 11:00:48 · update #2
I never said I was a god, I'm not Alvis, I'm one of his followers. He killed for your sins, dammit!
2006-12-08 11:07:21 · update #3
Wikipedia seems to be the best because it has a lot of info. Pages and pages. So what if stupid kids and morons go there? Why should you care? I hardly even go there anyway.
You should stop being a stupid show-off. You are not God! By saying that, you are being a BIG disgrace to God himself! Wikipedia must have turned you silly brain up-side down!
Besides, there are other places where you can find better stuff, so why worry? If you hate it, then don't talk about it. By, the way, your so dumb that you can't even spell re-write!
2006-12-08 11:05:31 · answer #1 · answered by xFrozen 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
There was an NPR story on this very thing last year. Lots of kids in schools across the nation cite Wikipedia for their sources, some subjects on there are spot on, but there are a lot of subjects listed where you'll find notations within the text for 'citation required' which should be closely noted when using it for a source.
I like Wikipedia, there's tons of easy to acquire information there which is spot on, but like most any source you use you have to back it up with additional corraborating sources.
Nothing in the world is perfect, and I'd bet you money that there are plenty of print sources available right now that don't have the same scrutiny which Wikipedia enjoys from peer review, as well as the handful of academic expert eggheads who occasionally pepper the site with their knowledge.
Don't take any single source for the gospel, back up your facts with something additional for support!
2006-12-08 11:01:33 · answer #2 · answered by somewherein72 4 · 5⤊ 0⤋
I think wikipedia is a great site for getting started. I would not quote it, but if I had to do a major research project, I'd definitely take a look.
Getting to know the terms and create a general overview of the topic is helpful, even if I have to validate the information on a secondary source.
2006-12-08 11:04:33 · answer #3 · answered by ddaniel_dr 1 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Wikipedia is an open community project. It isn't like that anyone can make changes to it and it be written in stone. It takes time for the information to be checked and evolved into an ultimate encyclopedia. If you don't care for a free encyclopedia there are many others that require you to pay for that service. Some of us cannot afford even that expense.
2006-12-08 11:02:46 · answer #4 · answered by aprier69 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Wikipedia is the new Hitchhikers guide, it is the fount of all wisdom and the depository of a human knowledge
I copied this for you:
Wikipedia is a multilingual, Web-based free content encyclopedia project. The name is a portmanteau of the words wiki and encyclopedia. Wikipedia is written collaboratively by volunteers, allowing most articles to be changed by almost anyone with access to the Web site. Its main servers are in Tampa, Florida, with additional servers in Amsterdam and Seoul.
Wikipedia was launched as an English language project on January 15, 2001, as a complement to the expert-written and now defunct Nupedia, and is now operated by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation. It was created by Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales; Sanger resigned from both Nupedia and Wikipedia on March 1, 2002. Wales has described Wikipedia as "an effort to create and distribute a multi-lingual free encyclopedia of the highest possible quality to every single person on the planet in their own language".
Currently Wikipedia has more than five million articles in many languages, including more than 1.5 million in the English-language version and more than half a million in the German-language version. There are 250 language editions of Wikipedia, and 18 of them have more than 50,000 articles each. The German-language edition has been distributed on DVD-ROM, and there have been proposals for an English DVD or print edition. Since its inception, Wikipedia has steadily risen in popularity,and has spawned several sister projects. According to Alexa, Wikipedia ranks among the top fifteen most visited sites, and many of its pages have been mirrored or forked by other sites, such as Answers.com.
2006-12-08 10:58:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 1⤋
Ha ha! That would be fabulous! Don't forget to re-write how Ben Franklin discovered electricity, and the biography of Abraham Lincoln!
Honestly, I think people like it, because it validates what they already thought was the answer. Urban myth has now found a place to become truth!!
2006-12-08 11:04:26 · answer #6 · answered by abfabmom1 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Did you even word that he reported "can the purple Sox win one hundred thirty video games" no longer "will the purple Sox win one hundred thirty video games"? I heavily doubt you may understand the adaptation between both in case you probably did besides. in case you took the time to study my put up you may comprehend that at no aspect did I say the purple Sox may win one hundred thirty video games I reported any MLB crew ought to in theory win one hundred thirty video games as all of them play 162 video games in a season so of route it truly is accessible, in theory, for a crew to win one hundred thirty video games. I also reported the purple Sox are probable to win extra video games than the Yankees. ninety 5% of the human beings i do not ignore that keep on with baseball may believe me on both factors. Jandy is a troll, and a particularly humorous one, spelling words incorrect and making grammatical mistakes is area of his humor. You on the different hand are curiously functionally illiterate, and that i do no longer imagine it really is in common words a gimmick on your case as i trust it truly is in Jandy's. yet then what do i understand? i'm only a moron purple Sox fan after all. Edit: Richie i imagine it really is those making relaxing human beings that are jealous human beings because you realize on your hearts that as purple Sox followers we've authentic classification so that you sense the opt to run us down. it extremely is advantageous purple Sox united states is tender as silk, it stages us no longer we've personality.
2016-11-24 23:50:07 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
haha yea, seriously. My english teacher won't even let us use it for our research papers so that just goes to show how accurate it is!
Oh and p.s its people like you who spell rewrite, re-wright that screw up Wikipedia!
2006-12-08 10:58:28 · answer #8 · answered by Rx 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
because it is quick facts that kids can put in their research papers. Kids are too lazy to pick their fat asses up and go to the libraby to get some good facts.
btw, whos Alvis and can i worship him too?
2006-12-08 10:59:15 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Good question.
I like wikipedia because it has cool information, that other sites lack.
2006-12-08 10:58:06 · answer #10 · answered by cowrepo 4 · 5⤊ 0⤋