A vast majority of the responses on Y.A. use wikipedia as a source. Do they not realize a lot of the information on their website is incorrect/false? At the college level, professors will not except quotes from wikipedia. In general, have people become so lazy that internet searches are all about the first hit/result? Why use a source that in many cases is not credible?
P.S. if you didn't realize anyone can add information on wikipedia.
2007-07-04 03:27:14 · 12 answers · asked by s game 1 in Education & Reference ➔ Quotations
Claudy_Boi:
Do a little research and you will be surprised by the amount of wikipedia critics. A lot of what I said is fact!
Beach Saint:
You just proved my point for me, like you said ANYONE can add information.
For the record, I caught 3 mistakes in the history section and the cultural anthro. section this past month. I did indeed report them. Also, other encyclopedia sources do indeed make mistakes but none of them have a reputation similar to wikipedia. The "others" tend to use information from credible contributors instead of the general public. That's part of the reason why many charge to use their services.
2007-07-04 04:04:42 · update #1
Yeah I've noticed that too. I guess people don't care whether or not they are giving people false answers as long as if it doesn't happen to them, and if it helps them (they're two points.) Something else that really bugs me is that some people make up false infomation just so they can get the ten points. AND that people put up false infomation on the web just to confuse people, I mean, whats the point? Yeah it really bugs me too.
2007-07-04 03:32:00 · answer #1 · answered by Your Add Here! 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
As a Yahoo armchair expert, I love Wikipedia precisely because it is compiled by "our people." As a longtime writer, I generally check the information given on Wikipedia with several references (including the author's citations) before I quote it as a source. However, in sourcing my answers I do give them top priority due to the very volunteer nature of the site.
Did you know even the Encyclopedia Britannica makes mistakes once in a while?
I think I will continue to put my faith in people who volunteer their considerable time, energy and talents.
When you spot an error, you can either report it or make the correction yourself. I'd be curious to know how many times you have made the effort to do this.
2007-07-04 03:43:46 · answer #2 · answered by Beach Saint 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Of course you are right, but the issue is far deeper than wikipedia. Wikipedia is supposed to be accurate information based on peer review. Science does the exact same thing. Scientists have published all kinds of science articles that scientists first accept as fact only to later realize they are wrong. Does that mean we should ignore all science journals too? Wikipedia has a good reputation as it has a lot of good information. We all put trust in things based on their reputation. Sometimes it's a good thing. Sometimes its a bad thing. Criticizing wikipedia alone would be very hypocritical. Secondly, your comparisons of yahoo answers questions and a professors homework assignment is a bad comparison.
2007-07-04 03:40:06 · answer #3 · answered by Evan 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
It's not the majority. I think it has gotten to be a lot less because everyone laughs at them, you can spot it a mile away with the 3-page pasted response that doesn't even answer the question, and any idiot knows that people write their own wiki entries. So I think you will see less and less of it .
2007-07-04 03:35:29 · answer #4 · answered by Kacky 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
But you also have to consider that the people answering questions may not also be correct either. It comes down to laziness on both the part of the asker and the replyer. If people wanted real and factual answers they probably shouldn't be asking here anyway!
2007-07-04 03:31:16 · answer #5 · answered by morrigin 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, they probably use it because it is free, and easily available to people here, since they're already on the internet anyway.
As far as it being inaccurate, "Two scholarly studies have concluded that vandalism is generally short-lived and that Wikipedia is generally as accurate as other encyclopedias."
2007-07-04 06:31:26 · answer #6 · answered by open4one 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
i think something "previous" must be incorrect. God has constantly been, is that why you reject Him? The bible is the written word of God. No way can the lost come close to information that. We quote scriptures in hopes somebody could open their eyes to the understanding of salvation earlier they finally end up in hell. that includes you.
2016-11-08 03:27:45 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think people are confused when it asks what our "Know your source" is, and they feel compelled to fill in the Source box.
Un be-known to them the information may not even be accurate!.
2007-07-04 03:30:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I agree with your point. Only thing worse is when people cut and paste huge answers.
2007-07-04 03:28:49 · answer #9 · answered by Abby Normal 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
wiki or wikipedia is a a very good research base edit by everyone! that is y evryone uses it . also it is free and you can look up anything. from poo u find on the floor to ufo's!
2007-07-04 03:31:02 · answer #10 · answered by xen13 2 · 1⤊ 4⤋