Wikipedia is notorious for inaccuracies posted on its site, yet people depend on it for knowledge. It is not a credible source in academia.
2007-02-14 10:45:47 · 5 answers · asked by Patrick the Carpathian, CaFO 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
To the people who want to answer a question here who have no knowledge of the subject at all, inaccuracies are better than nothing.
2007-02-14 10:50:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's depended on because Wikipedia has entries on more obscure topics, with a lot more "candid" (that might be the wrong word) information. Also, it's constantly revised and checked, so although there may be fallacies, they are corrected, if not also flagged as incorrect information. I can definitely say that Wikipedia has saved me for a number of school projects, and I never got any complaints about wrong information.
2007-02-14 18:50:34 · answer #2 · answered by bchic89 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
because it is an easy resource. You could search on google, but then you would have to search through the sites listed and pick which one has the best information. With Wikipedia, you simply go there, copy a link or information and post it here. I see nothing wrong with getting information from wikipedia. I do it all the time.
2007-02-14 18:50:05 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, but a lot of their stuff is correct as well.
2007-02-14 18:50:39 · answer #4 · answered by incubabe 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
yep.
2007-02-14 18:48:36 · answer #5 · answered by Royal Racer Hell=Grave © 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋