i want to start using whichever one is the fastest, largest, most up to date, enclopdiea there is on the internet pls help
2007-08-03 11:19:41 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
It depends on what you want to research. If you're looking for citable facts, I'd stay away from wikipedia because a lot of the information is incomplete, though often it is the most entertaining and easiest to read and admittedly, true most of the time.
brittanica.com, worldbook.com, and encarta.msn.com are more thoroughly researched and updated by real experts, where as information on wikipedia can be entered by anyone.
2007-08-03 11:30:03 · answer #1 · answered by Vangorn2000 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Why choose? the two have effective properties uniquely effective to guy or woman consumers and their queries. Brittanica, (and distinctive others) grant properly researched and intently stated techniques on distinctive subjects. With one in all those reference artwork, you're able to be notably specific that the techniques is precise. Wikipedia provides information on distinctive subjects that Brittanica could in no way even evaluate publishing. the place else are you able to get one in all those wealth of techniques on South Park episodes and characters? the place else am i able to seem up 3 hundred and sixty 5 days to 3 hundred and sixty 5 days, distinctive techniques of alterations made to Ford Crown Victoria Police Cruisers? i don't could decide and don't see the could desire to fee one extra effectual than the different. I't like asking that's extra effectual? A formula One open wheel racer, or a Hummer? neither is extra effectual than the different in that's own particular utility.
2016-11-11 03:42:28 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Encarta is the best, though it's not free. Generally, you get what you pay for. I don't trust Wiki for any information. You can always just do a google search and find lots of information, though you can't accept all of it as true.
2007-08-03 11:24:21 · answer #3 · answered by A Plague on your houses 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Just remember it's the victor who write the history of events. Wiki is good. It's free. There are errors. Still Columbia Encyclopedia or Britainnica are better.
2007-08-03 11:32:48 · answer #4 · answered by mac 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Generally speaking, wiki is something I would only use as a basic starting point with the knowledge that the information could be wrong.
2007-08-03 11:37:59 · answer #5 · answered by rz1971 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I like wikopedia because it's usually easy to understand, but the accuracy of it is sometimes questionable because anyone can edit/add to the information there.
2007-08-03 11:38:28 · answer #6 · answered by Gabby_Gabby_Purrsalot 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
encarta, it is not as complete as the paid version, but it beats wikipedia by a mile.
2007-08-03 11:32:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Encarta is the best.
wikipedia has alot of false information
2007-08-03 11:27:15 · answer #8 · answered by .;.Love =] 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
wikipedia is good but i think britanica and encarta are better
2007-08-03 11:37:20 · answer #9 · answered by saeed4705 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋