 |
 |
Wikipedia to writers: Prove your expertise
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on till morning
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
All men are created equal, but what they do after that point puts them on a sliding scale.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status:
Offline
|
|
Always seemed pretty good for things that aren't particularly contentious.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South Korea
Status:
Offline
|
|
Well, it's like they say: The head and feet keep warm, the rest will take no harm.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Tiresias 
Well, it's like they say: The head and feet keep warm, the rest will take no harm.
Well, I wanted to come up with an example of the kind of thing Wiki is great for, and the only example I could come up with was when I wanted to know what those furry Russian hats are called.
Oh, it's "ushanka" in case I've made anyone curious.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South Korea
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Tiresias
Man. I so hope the funny part isn't Wiki being wrong about the hat. 
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Status:
Offline
|
|
most things on wikipedia do have references. If you don't trust the page, follow the references for yourself. If you don't want to take the time to do that, take wikipedia's word for it.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Garden of Paradise Motel, Suite 3D
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Sky Captain
A lot of it. Even simple stuff. I've found all kinds of errors in the space program listings and other things that I looked up just to refresh some other part of my memory.
It's no better than asking someone on the street in many cases, and it's about time that there's some scrutiny by the folks who have the most to lose - the organizers. Heck, one of the creators even left to start a site that requires a review of credentials.
|
|
He can be fixed -- you can't.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Manhattan, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
That guy sounds a lot smarter than most legitimate college professors I know.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status:
Offline
|
|
Meh, wikipedia is just for very quick referance. Anyone can write anything. Who care what people pretend to be.
Their word on Wikipedia is worth as much/little as anyone else's.
V
|
|
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton
most things on wikipedia do have references. If you don't trust the page, follow the references for yourself. If you don't want to take the time to do that, take wikipedia's word for it.
Exactly. This is why Wikipedia demands that articles be sourced.
Originally Posted by finboy
It's no better than asking someone on the street in many cases.
Actually, in the worst case, it's basically no worse than polling many different people and taking the most common and complete answer.
|
|
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Washington DC
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2007
Status:
Offline
|
|
A lot of college and grade school profs say not to do their research from Wikipedia.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Washington DC
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by earthlings
A lot of college and grade school profs say not to do their research from Wikipedia.
I suspect that has more to do with wanting their students to learn how to actually do research than anything else. Looking something up in an encyclopedia, traditional or otherwise, does not constitute academic research.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by earthlings
A lot of college and grade school profs say not to do their research from Wikipedia.
Hmm...
I wouldn't cite it, but it seems silly not to use it as a starting point from where you start finding actual references.
I actually kind of like that it needs to be read with an extra-critical eye. Frankly, more things need to be read that way.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
The problem I think wikipedia has, is its strength, anyone can edit an article. If you're looking to compete against established encylopedia's in terms of accuracy and realibility you're going to lose because encylopedia articles are edited by one firm, where as wikipedia is wide open.
I read somewhere that some collages are not allowing students to use wikipedia for references because of this.
|
|
Michael
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by subego
I actually kind of like that it needs to be read with an extra-critical eye. Frankly, more things need to be read that way.
Agreed. That's what I like about MacNN Forums too 
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by mac128k-1984
I read somewhere that some collages are not allowing students to use wikipedia for references because of this.
As nonhuman pointed out, encyclopaedias of any sort are usually not considered a legitimate "reference." You should be using primary literature. Like Wikipedia they're a great place to start and get ideas from, but if you're citing then you're gonna get smacked down.
greg
|
|
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by finboy
A lot of it. Even simple stuff. I've found all kinds of errors in the space program listings and other things that I looked up just to refresh some other part of my memory.
That's how Wikipedia works. If you find an error, then CORRECT IT. You have the power to do so for a reason.
In that regard, Wikipedia is self-correcting. Any edits are peer-reviewed all the time. At any given stage, it will contain errors, but those errors will be corrected in time. (As long as they are not highly contentious issues).
Originally Posted by finboy
It's no better than asking someone on the street in many cases, and it's about time that there's some scrutiny by the folks who have the most to lose - the organizers. Heck, one of the creators even left to start a site that requires a review of credentials.
Wikipedia is just ONE source. And as a source it should be treated with the scrutiny and critical examination of the USER of that source. Always use multiple separate sources.
The one difference with Wikipedia is of course that you have the power to correct that source if found erroneous. Now try that with a printed encyclopaedia or academic paper.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2007
Status:
Offline
|
|
I still search Wikipedia for stuff. I like to correct stuff on there.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
