|
|
Post by kuwabara on Feb 20, 2007 19:05:18 GMT -5
Wikipedia is not a reliable source and is not written by zoologist experts. I am going to try and up date the sight personally, however it should only be used as basic info and should not be used in a debate unless you can confirm it with official evidence or if I clear it as usable evidence. You can post it as back ground evidence on animals in a debate, but people need to know that it is not a completely accurate site and is likely to have many inaccurate statements that are purely opinion based off simple bias.
|
|
|
|
Post by darthrevan on Feb 20, 2007 19:15:27 GMT -5
You can post it as back ground evidence on animals in a debate, but people need to know that it is not a completely accurate site and is likely to have many inaccurate statements that are purely opinion based off simple bias. It's not just Wikipedia. Since anyone can make a website, and write whatever they want, people have to check on their informatoin where ever they go. Plus, I am pretty sure that Wikipedia has a team where all they do is read over everything written on there. They basically check everything for accuracy, and make sure people don't write just a bunch of crap. |
|
|
|
Post by kuwabara on Feb 20, 2007 19:28:47 GMT -5
You can post it as back ground evidence on animals in a debate, but people need to know that it is not a completely accurate site and is likely to have many inaccurate statements that are purely opinion based off simple bias. It's not just Wikipedia. Since anyone can make a website, and write whatever they want, people have to check on their informatoin where ever they go. Plus, I am pretty sure that Wikipedia has a team where all they do is read over everything written on there. They basically check everything for accuracy, and make sure people don't write just a bunch of crap. True people need to make sure there info is accurate and abck by reliable sources. if wiki team does have that then they do a shitty job. I cna name 5 parts off the top of my head that are inaccurate |
|
|
|
Post by darthrevan on Feb 20, 2007 20:57:13 GMT -5
Basically people need to be careful about any info they get from any website, mostly from wikipedia.
|
|
The Big Daddy C-Master
Big Daddy 
Living life to the fullest, and it feels great.
I'm still here... for now...
Posts: 26,387
|
Post by The Big Daddy C-Master on Feb 20, 2007 21:57:06 GMT -5
You can post it as back ground evidence on animals in a debate, but people need to know that it is not a completely accurate site and is likely to have many inaccurate statements that are purely opinion based off simple bias. It's not just Wikipedia. Since anyone can make a website, and write whatever they want, people have to check on their informatoin where ever they go. Plus, I am pretty sure that Wikipedia has a team where all they do is read over everything written on there. They basically check everything for accuracy, and make sure people don't write just a bunch of crap. And it gets deleted fast. But you should still double check your information... |
|
|
|
Post by kuwabara on Feb 21, 2007 0:27:16 GMT -5
It's not just Wikipedia. Since anyone can make a website, and write whatever they want, people have to check on their informatoin where ever they go. Plus, I am pretty sure that Wikipedia has a team where all they do is read over everything written on there. They basically check everything for accuracy, and make sure people don't write just a bunch of crap. And it gets deleted fast. But you should still double check your information... No it does not. The windu crap been up for months sames as the crap on the croc's one alone with many other animals sections. Many have been like that fro many months. |
|
Magic attack
Head Advisor
The guy everyone loves.
Posts: 542
|
Post by Magic attack on Feb 21, 2007 4:12:04 GMT -5
And it gets deleted fast. But you should still double check your information... No it does not. The windu crap been up for months sames as the crap on the croc's one alone with many other animals sections. Many have been like that fro many months. Was the Windu crap on Wikipedia or Wookieepedia? Just wondering. Both sites can be edited by fans, but if you read there is usually connotations regarding check for accuracy. The site is pretty huge, and is always getting bigger. So it is understandable that they are behind. The best thing to do with any research is to take from multiple sources. Good luck on updating the site, let us know which entries are yours. |
|
The Big Daddy C-Master
Big Daddy
Living life to the fullest, and it feels great.
I'm still here... for now...
Posts: 26,387
|
Post by The Big Daddy C-Master on Feb 21, 2007 9:07:42 GMT -5
And it gets deleted fast. But you should still double check your information... No it does not. The windu crap been up for months sames as the crap on the croc's one alone with many other animals sections. Many have been like that fro many months. Yes it does, I did a huge collaboration on it for Duke 3d, I made tons of changes, and I've seen other people's bad ones done over within all of 10 minutes. They have staff buzzing. Wiki is good for info, but I wouldn't use it to write a college paper. |
|
|
|
Post by warmunger on Feb 21, 2007 17:18:19 GMT -5
Check and see if you can find out how I edited T.I.'s BackGround info, you should find my edits in the 1st few sentences under Background. Let me remind you all, that I am in no way involved with Wiki. A simpe strander. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T.I.#Background #hysterical# |
|
|
|
Post by warmunger on Feb 21, 2007 17:30:44 GMT -5
Check and see if you can find out how I edited T.I.'s BackGround info, you should find my edits in the 1st few sentences under Background. Let me remind you all, that I am in no way involved with Wiki. A simpe strander. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T.I.#Background #hysterical# Oh wait, they changed it back, it was still funny though. |
|
Blanka
C-Tier
dumb member
Posts: 200
|
Post by Blanka on Feb 21, 2007 18:02:27 GMT -5
|
|
The Big Daddy C-Master
Big Daddy
Living life to the fullest, and it feels great.
I'm still here... for now...
Posts: 26,387
|
Post by The Big Daddy C-Master on Feb 21, 2007 23:09:37 GMT -5
Check and see if you can find out how I edited T.I.'s BackGround info, you should find my edits in the 1st few sentences under Background. Let me remind you all, that I am in no way involved with Wiki. A simpe strander. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T.I.#Background #hysterical# Oh wait, they changed it back, it was still funny though. How long did it take for them to do that? |
|
|
|
Post by warmunger on Feb 22, 2007 21:25:02 GMT -5
Like 10 minutes, they warned me too!
|
|
The Big Daddy C-Master
Big Daddy
Living life to the fullest, and it feels great.
I'm still here... for now...
Posts: 26,387
|
Post by The Big Daddy C-Master on Feb 22, 2007 21:34:20 GMT -5
Like 10 minutes, they warned me too! What did you write exactly? |
|
|
|
Post by warmunger on Feb 22, 2007 21:46:49 GMT -5
They said something like "Vandalizing is illegal as you did to T.I. and If I continue I will be baned from Wiki." Some chump named Yamala told me that crap. Likes it's a real privilege to use Wikipedia. They are the same guys that said that Gouki uses the raging storm and that Iori was gay.
|
|
The Big Daddy C-Master
Big Daddy
Living life to the fullest, and it feels great.
I'm still here... for now...
Posts: 26,387
|
Post by The Big Daddy C-Master on May 22, 2012 7:38:59 GMT -5
You have some ignorant people on that website, for sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blaze72 on May 22, 2012 9:22:26 GMT -5
Wikipedia is reliable source on some topics it is right.
|
|
The Big Daddy C-Master
Big Daddy
Living life to the fullest, and it feels great.
I'm still here... for now...
Posts: 26,387
|
Post by The Big Daddy C-Master on May 22, 2012 10:13:25 GMT -5
Wikipedia is reliable source on some topics it is right. Wikipedia is a good, fun read. I wouldn't use it on any official reports or something professional, but it is a good entertaining place to read from. I like TV Tropes as well. |
|
|
|
Post by Coolest thing Alive on Jun 27, 2012 19:31:54 GMT -5
Wiki can be very informative on certain things, I find myself readin wiki alot. However, I would never use it for anything beyond random readin.
|
|
