Says who, you? Speak for yourself, asshole.
Wiki is one of a very few survivors of the radical right's attacks on
objective information and reporting in the U.S. May it live a very
long and very prosperous life.
Any reference material that can be doctored by an Tom, Dick or Harry becomes
useless almost immediately.
Wikipedia is hardly a reliable reference source.
Home of the Great Eastern Railway
in article firstname.lastname@example.org, Roger
T. at email@example.com wrote on 6/17/06 11:27 AM:
At least on science articles, Widipedia is about as accurate as the
Encyclopedia Britannica, according to a the British journal "Nature." (ref:
Any T, D, or H can post, but now they are reviewed. The biggest problem
which Wiki has is that the articles are generally not well written and are
disorganized. Erroneous posts are quickly corrected by other posters. If a
peer reviewed journal makes a mistake (like was done by the NE Journal of
Medicine regarding Vioxx: some pertinent data was not included), it takes
years to get a correction.
There is a place for Wiki as well as for traditional reference work: they
should be used in conjunction with each other.
Because Wiki has no peer review of the information posted, anybody can
(and has) post anything they wish as fact.
The credulous read this and take it as truth.
In its current form it is a colossal waste of electrons.
It was a good idea with a flawed implementation. After it dies under the
accumulated load of rubbish posted as fact I would hope that something
better would rise in its place.
What he said.
If I were a teacher--at ANY level--I would forbid my students to use it
for any type of research.
But I do highly recommend it to anyone who wants to know about every
Simpsons episode ever made, every bit of Star Trek trivia, or
role-playing game information.
I hope that in a few years it [Wikipedia] will be so bloated that it
will simply disintegrate, because I can't stand the thought that this
Obviously you know little about how Wiki REALLY works. It has immediate
and effective TRUE peer review. Yes, a page can be vandalized.. but it
usually doesn't last long, and a quick look at the page history tells
I've been involved in a few corrections of revisionism, for example as
done by fans of a self-published pseudo-author who claimed awards he
wasn't entitled to. It's interesting how well it actually works.
And this is different from a paper encyclopedia how, exactly?
The longer it lasts the better, more comprehensive, and more accurate it
Evaluating all GUIs by the example of Windows is like evaluating all cars
by the example of Yugos.
Yeppie, flex track will hold it's shape very nicely. Not only that, but you
will have a lot less trackage problems as there will be a lot less
railjoints where mechanical and electrical problems abound. There are times
where I wished that the standard for bare rail was 6' or even longer as this
decreases the number of joints even more. I often solder two rails together
to get that longer length when hand laying rail (the most reliable trackwork
of all) on my layout.
Why do penguins walk so far to get to their nesting grounds?
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.