Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  


Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Wikipedia still can't be trusted, I guess  (Read 2236 times)

Red Dog Dragon

  • Baron
  • *****
  • Posts: 2001
  • Pink Pony is Best Pony
Re: Wikipedia still can't be trusted, I guess
« Reply #10 on: January 23, 2011, 12:01:00 AM »

General rule with Wikipedia: If the info you're looking for is important (IE for a paper) or a politically charged subject, don't trust Wikipedia.

If it's just some little interesting nugget of info, feel free to believe what you read.  Even if it's wrong, it won't make a whole lot of difference.

teh leet haxor

  • Vassal
  • ****
  • Posts: 417
Re: Wikipedia still can't be trusted, I guess
« Reply #11 on: January 23, 2011, 08:29:19 AM »

Some argue that Wikipedia is not always NPOV  >.>

On a serious note, yes, I mainly trust Wikipedia when it comes to fact-sheets, tables of stuff, etc as opposed to current events. For example, I might look for a list of web server software, and it will tell me which are freeware, which are open source, what platforms they are available for; all of that as objective, undisputable fact.

Of course the reality can change, so for a limited duration the information will be out of date, but otherwise it's like listing which counting-numbers are prime or composite. 2, 3 and 5 are prime not because someone thinks so or because a higher power declared them to be so, they just *are* so. No matter what happens to the universe, any arrangement of 5 objects into a rectangle will always and forever end up as a single row of 5.


  • Guest
Re: Wikipedia still can't be trusted, I guess
« Reply #12 on: January 23, 2011, 09:12:39 PM »

Wikipedia is a valid source of knowledge but it is not a valid source for a research paper. If you find something on Wikipedia you want to put in your paper, go to the citations and source the real source material. In terms of it's neutrality, your own opinion matters just as much as what is written in the articles. Their older less-interesting articles are pretty neutral from what I have read. There aren't many ways you can insert your opinion into an article about the Citric Acid Cycle or the Soviet-German relations before 1941. Although there is a slight liberal viewpoint in some of their newer articles on the Iraq war and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.
As for the original question, No I do not think the majority of our society cares about the truth anymore. People like to be told that they are right and there is no longer a profitable place for the neutral end of the spectrum. This isn't helped by the fact that news channels want a profit at the end of the day. The giant elephant in the room-FOX News is raking in the money right now and they aren't even close to being "fair and balanced". Their viewers want the content that they provide and the advertisers want the views. There is no reason for them to stop catering to their chosen demographic.

I get most of my news from the BBC and the NPR in the mornings. At least the government's news focuses on actively tries to be neutral instead of profits. Ironic?
Pages: 1 [2]