Posted by seamar_116 on 1/24/2013 10:16:00 AM (view original):
Posted by toddcommish on 1/24/2013 10:02:00 AM (view original):
Well, ANYONE who references Wikipedia as a "source" during a discussion is pretty lame. You might as well say "some random guy on the internet says..."
Actually, there are research librarians who now advocate for the inclusion of Wiki as credible sources. Many wiki pages are footnoted and one can get to the original sources. Of course, caution is always warranted, as it should be with ANY source. A "biased-free" source for anything created or interpreted by humans simply does not exist. But just because an opinion is biased does not make it false.
An opinion isn't a fact, it's an interpretation of a fact. The earth revolves around the sun. That is a fact. God (or the Spaghetti Monster) is responsible for creating the earth-sun relationship. That is an opinion.
Just because some research librarians think Wiki is credible doesn't make it so. The internet is filled with unsubstantiated, logically fallacious documents. A Wiki simply aggregates, centralizes, and summarizes them... and maybe does some cross-checking for validation.