« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: What's Legit?  (Read 1871 times)

Ironica

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
What's Legit?
« on: May 20, 2011, 01:31:39 AM »
0
Since most people don't trust Wiki and some put down other sites due to how they lean, how about we have a list of accepted sites so people can look at those sites in the future instead of finding another site that will end up being dismissed because some one thinks it leans too much toward a certain view.
Logged

Offline Minister Polarius

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15920
  • Grand Minister of Music and Video Games
    • -
    • East Central Region
    • Macclelland Music
Re: What's Legit?
« Reply #1 on: May 20, 2011, 02:47:37 AM »
0
Unfortunately, the short answer to the question in the topic is, "whatever agrees with the person speaking."
Logged
I am not talking about T2 unless I am explicitly talking about T2. Also Mayhem is fine now somehow!

Offline Prof Underwood

  • Redemption Elder
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8597
    • -
    • East Central Region
Re: What's Legit?
« Reply #2 on: May 20, 2011, 09:22:34 AM »
0
Quote from: Prof Underwood on July 09, 2009, 02:12:36 PM
Wikipedia gets a bad rap due to the fact that users have the ability to edit most postings there.  However, according to arguably the most prestigious scientific journal, Nature, “Wikipedia comes close to Britannica in terms of the accuracy of its science entries” (1).  In my own experience, I have also found Wikipedia to be very accurate when it comes to any subject that is not popularly controversial.  And I have found Wikipedia to actually be at least as objective at reporting both sides of a popularly controversial subject as the mainstream media tends to be.

If I find something there that seems incredulous, then I would check other sources to ensure its accuracy.  But in general, I think that Wikipedia is worth trusting.
 
1 - article link
Logged

Warrior_Monk

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: What's Legit?
« Reply #3 on: May 20, 2011, 11:29:19 AM »
0
If a college professor would accept it, I'll accept it. Which includes basically everything that isn't wikipedia.
Logged

Lamborghini_diablo

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: What's Legit?
« Reply #4 on: May 20, 2011, 11:30:44 AM »
0
If all else fails, just use the sources at the bottom of the Wikipedia page.
Logged

Offline The Thing

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • "..."
Re: What's Legit?
« Reply #5 on: May 20, 2011, 01:20:15 PM »
0
Quote from: Ring Wraith on May 20, 2011, 11:29:19 AM
If a college professor would accept it, I'll accept it. Which includes basically everything that isn't wikipedia.

I've actually had a couple of professors say they'd accept Wikipedia... Anyways, I go with the notion that Wikipedia is a good source of information when used for your own personal understanding but not as an academic source for schoolwork. I had a classmate back in high school who used to go on and change around Wikipedia articles for fun though, and I'm certain he still does it. That's part of the reason why I would be wary of accepting it as an academic source. It can be a good supplemental tool with academic writing though in trying to understand what other sources are saying and for organizing thoughts on certain subjects.
Logged

Rawrlolsauce!

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: What's Legit?
« Reply #6 on: May 20, 2011, 04:26:33 PM »
0
I trust wikipedia if it isn't a controversial issue. So basically anything that doesn't relate to politics, pop culture, or religion.
Logged

lp670sv

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: What's Legit?
« Reply #7 on: May 20, 2011, 04:31:19 PM »
0
true story some moron i used to go to school with actually made a wikipedia page of me that said I was the second coming of christ and had a photoshopped picture of the traditional view of jesus with my face over his. it took 3 days to remove it. he liked messing with wikipedia
Logged

Chronic Apathy

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: What's Legit?
« Reply #8 on: May 22, 2011, 08:23:08 PM »
0
People who don't trust Wikipedia based on the fact that it's Wikipedia are just being willfully ignorant. I have several friends who (and I also used to do this) mess with Wikipedia pages all the time, and anything that's less than legitimate or unsourced is taken down within a half hour, easily; even on pages that aren't trafficked often. Wikipedia takes it very serious. Anyone can edit, but any edits that aren't completely legit are taken down quickly and efficiently.
Logged

Warrior_Monk

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: What's Legit?
« Reply #9 on: May 22, 2011, 08:34:12 PM »
0
Why wikipedia shouldn't be trusted

I still use wikipedia all the time to gain summaries.
Logged

Chronic Apathy

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: What's Legit?
« Reply #10 on: May 22, 2011, 08:57:13 PM »
0
Quote from: Ring Wraith on May 22, 2011, 08:34:12 PM
Why wikipedia shouldn't be trusted

I still use wikipedia all the time to gain summaries.

And that was back in 2009; they're even more sophisticated now.
Logged

lp670sv

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: What's Legit?
« Reply #11 on: May 22, 2011, 09:16:20 PM »
0
Quote from: Ring Wraith on May 22, 2011, 08:34:12 PM
Why wikipedia shouldn't be trusted

I still use wikipedia all the time to gain summaries.

thats actually an argument for it. Wikipedia caught it and removed it, so that wikipedia page is now more accurate then all of the archive newspapers magazines and video clips from the "credible sources"
Logged

Offline SomeKittens

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • *****
  • Posts: 8102
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: What's Legit?
« Reply #12 on: May 23, 2011, 12:59:32 AM »
0
Quote from: Ring Wraith on May 20, 2011, 11:29:19 AM
If a college professor would accept it, I'll accept it. Which includes basically everything that isn't wikipedia.
I've had a professor assign a Wikipedia page as reading.
Logged
Mind not the ignorant fool on the other side of the screen!-BubbleBoy
Code: [Select]
postcount.add(1);

Warrior_Monk

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: What's Legit?
« Reply #13 on: May 23, 2011, 01:17:05 AM »
0
Quote from: lp670sv on May 22, 2011, 09:16:20 PM
Quote from: Ring Wraith on May 22, 2011, 08:34:12 PM
Why wikipedia shouldn't be trusted

I still use wikipedia all the time to gain summaries.

thats actually an argument for it. Wikipedia caught it and removed it, so that wikipedia page is now more accurate then all of the archive newspapers magazines and video clips from the "credible sources"
They didn't remove it soon enough. It was used as a reliable source and misinformation got out. Who's to say that the current page your on didn't happen to be edited a second before you opened it?
Quote from: SomeKittens on May 23, 2011, 12:59:32 AM
Quote from: Ring Wraith on May 20, 2011, 11:29:19 AM
If a college professor would accept it, I'll accept it. Which includes basically everything that isn't wikipedia.
I've had a professor assign a Wikipedia page as reading.
I remember you telling me that. It's very strange.
Logged

Rawrlolsauce!

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: What's Legit?
« Reply #14 on: May 23, 2011, 07:37:13 AM »
+2
Quote from: Ring Wraith on May 23, 2011, 01:17:05 AM
Who's to say that the current page your on didn't happen to be edited a second before you opened it?
The edit history.
Logged

Offline SomeKittens

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • *****
  • Posts: 8102
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: What's Legit?
« Reply #15 on: May 23, 2011, 11:07:37 AM »
0
Since then, I've heard of a couple other professors do the same thing.  One notable example is a theology professor assigned the Christianity page so that students could see alternate views on Jesus.
Logged
Mind not the ignorant fool on the other side of the screen!-BubbleBoy
Code: [Select]
postcount.add(1);

lp670sv

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: What's Legit?
« Reply #16 on: May 23, 2011, 07:31:48 PM »
0
Quote from: Ring Wraith on May 23, 2011, 01:17:05 AM

They didn't remove it soon enough. It was used as a reliable source and misinformation got out. Who's to say that the current page your on didn't happen to be edited a second before you opened it?


the point is wikipedia changes as the facts come out. encyclopedias and the like do not. new scientific fact invalidates an older one? in 30 minutes wikipedia has the new one. the reference material will have it when the new edition comes out in 5 years. Most experts have already acknowledged that wikipedia is more accurate then the encylopedia britannica.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
 
SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal