Hmm. Let me see...
*clicks on another window for a few moments*
...Perhaps it's because Yahoo Answers is more about social networking than providing accurate information.
2007-12-22 12:01:49
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Merry Christmas!
http://www.californiamall.com/holidaytraditions/
2007-12-22 11:10:39
·
answer #2
·
answered by Buke 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nobody, except Jesus Himself, has a corner on the Truth. On wikipedia, it's basically an anonymous collection of things, but here, you can get a broad spectrum of ideas and opinions. Some give their sources, and/or a reference to what and why they believe.
Besides, isn't it more exciting here than wikipedia?
2007-12-22 11:32:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by Brother Jonathan 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
i don't trust wikipedia for any answers. anyone can edit that stuff and i know a couple of jerks who edit in incorrect info just for fun. google what you want to and then pick a site strictly about the thing you're looking up. but, if it's not something you can just look up, go ahead and ask.
2007-12-22 10:57:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by halloweenie 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
1) Wikipedia isn't the most reliable place for information.
2) R & S is good for different opinions.
2007-12-22 10:55:49
·
answer #5
·
answered by Beletje_vos AM + VT 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
The best R&S questions cannot be answered with anything other than an opinion.
Facts are boring. I want vitriolic opinion, dammit!
2007-12-22 10:58:13
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
It would make 99.99% of the people asking look much less stupid. And frankly it would have come in really handy in your questions about agnostics
2007-12-22 11:01:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by tuyet n 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Either that or youtube videos. Apparently some people think those are all gospel, irrefutable, truth.
2007-12-22 10:55:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by Cheryl E 7
·
2⤊
0⤋