rethinking wikipedia

brianl

Maybe it is credible. After all... http://m.livescience.com/32950-how-accurate-is-wikipedia.html

Vitaliy_Kiselev

Knowledge of history, science and different views is that matter in reality,

Wikipedia is just shitty thing made by elites for masses so they could always get the dominant and approved view fast and without any doubts.

brianl

@vitaliy i could provide citations that prove you wrong, but they'd be citations from wikipedia...

Vitaliy_Kiselev

You do not need any citations, you just need some grey cells that function correctly.

DrDave

I would estimate that of the articles on classical music, maybe 60-75 percent are plagiarized. And part of the problem is that it takes a long time for the editorial process to work.

goanna

Wikipedia or not, Wikis per se have been shown to work and I for one would love to see a Personal-View wiki which would bring to the surface the best of what we've all learned here.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

Personal-View wiki which would bring to the surface the best of what we've all learned here.

We have wiki at http://www.personal-view.com/faqs/ , if you want to help, you are welcome.

goanna

I was thinking of hack settings reviews and advice.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

I was thinking of hack settings reviews and advice.

You kind of 2 years late.

kurth

All information sources are compromised, and more so the further one goes from accepted wisdom.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters