I was looking through some of the answers given by different people and see where they use as a reference wikipedia for their answers. I then did some checking and find that the information on wikipedia comes from the people at large and is in no way authorative because anyone can submit something to them whether it is true and correct or not. My question is if that's the case why do so many rely on wikipedia to get the answers they use on here? Is it really that reliable for confirming anything at all?
2007-12-07 05:34:30 · 8 answers · asked by Fool 4 Tommy Collins ? ? 6 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Music ➔ Country
Probably because it is the first thing that pops up when you search for someones name. I agree, news reports have done stories on wiki sights and found about 80% to be false just because as you said it's a place where anyone can enter information. The other day on fox the morning news casters checked their wiki pages and found out that two of them were dead. lol. Some one had listed them as deceased.
2007-12-07 05:40:15 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I don't know what to tell you, except that I'm finding the fan clubs or the stars' own web pages are more accurate on the information than wikipedia is.
2007-12-07 10:08:03 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Again, this site is used as a "resource"; a tool. There are and have been inconsistencies posted to it but there is a large base of people that use it and will have errors removed. It is up to the individual to decide to go with or it or research further as to the validity of what is there. It is as reliable as say; I decide to trust any information you or anyone else gives me. It is up to me and my particular interest in any given subject to do further research to substantiate any information given. As the person above stated...to the best of her ability.
2007-12-07 06:54:38 · answer #3 · answered by kathleen 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The times I used Wiki, I have confirmed the answers given there with further research...as much as possible anyway.
BTW What a great question.
2007-12-07 05:42:08 · answer #4 · answered by She's Back 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Though Wikipedia has imposters because of its free posting, it also has the ability to correct those mistakes and back up its statements with footnotes of proof. Supposedly you have to become a member in good standing now to post.
2007-12-07 05:50:54 · answer #5 · answered by Your Uncle Dodge! 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
i personally treat this format as a "trivia" game. if you don't have the answer in your head, skip it and go on to the next one. were it a contest, i'd use all the resources availble.(including wikipedia). that doesn't answer your question, but i had to put in my 27 cents worth (i meant 2 cents worth)
2007-12-07 08:43:16 · answer #6 · answered by Manofthewest 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
And all this time I've just relied on my often faulty memory, could've borrowed someone else's faulty info & blamed on some danged 'expert'! My answers aren't always good, but they're mine.
2007-12-07 14:02:03 · answer #7 · answered by okie's back 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i personally would never use it for just that reason. I might look at it to see what it says. It might give me somewhere to start looking for a more "reputable" source in my eyes. I don't trust it.
2007-12-07 09:36:52 · answer #8 · answered by muddy_boggs 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋