Who really needs information on Wikipedia? Please look for a lengthy explanation of pros and cons- Not.?

Question

Who really needs information on Wikipedia? Please look for a lengthy explanation of pros and cons- Not.?

Answer 1

Depends on the kind of information you need. Highly technical information or instances where factual accuracy is required might require that you research someplace other than Wikipedia. Academic research or job-related research, I would limit my use of Wikipedia to simply getting hints on other sources of information to use.



However, I do use Wikipedia when researching "pop culture" references or other recreational research. Casual learning where you are not getting graded on the accuracy of the information. I have usually found that for "Geek-related subjects", Wikipedia is pretty good. Anything you want to know about "Star Wars", "Star Trek" or anything like that can be found on Wikipedia, and discussed ad nauseum (remembering a fairly long article written on "Light Saber Combat Techniques")

Answer 2

i've got no longer yet owned a boxer - yet particularly do like them - yet I even have owned or at the instant very own the different 3 breeds - All of my canines got here from rescues - all have been and are staggering animals. all and sundry of them! Even the yankee Bulldog - or Pit Bull. undergo in suggestions that once you compromise on a breed of canines - rescue canines are suited alternatives. the main important to possessing any canines is obedience practise. determine you bypass to an excellent type and shop up together with his practise even after the class is over - Obedience is a great activity btw - and suited use of those canines power. inspect communities' canines ordinances earlier you get any canines. regrettably, in US, some communities have banned the pit bull or American Bulldog - it relatively is bigoted yet know that. As a youthful grad, you could ought to bypass the place the artwork is - no longer it relatively is handy on your decision of canines. additionally, determine you have carved out important time to spend consisting of your canines. those canines require a minimum of two hours an afternoon of "your" time - be it practise, taking part in, or merely putting out on the settee - they choose YOU. base line - all 4 canines may well be great pets.

Answer 3

yes wikipedia is good for searching the most advanced things with over 1 mil articles

Answer 4

No thanks.

Answer 5

wikipedia is not the best site to find info, find some sites with .gov or .org

Answer 6

I don't count on wiki, its mostly unreliable info.

No thanks, no info needed for the obvious reasons.

Answer 7

yes i want info.....plz!

Answer 8

Yes, well it isn't 100% correct, but with a bit of investigation you may know a lot of reliable information, and that information should be used to feed back wikipedia, but most people never do that (that's why it isn't very complet...)

Answer 9

Lots of people searching for a wide range of information go to wikipedia for clarification or confirmation.



Even webmasters go there for some information for their webpages



Basically, Wikipedia is a free, open content, community-built encyclopedia with thousands of articles on topics from A to Z. Available in dozens of languages.

Answer 10

No, the source is completely unreliable and inaccurate with regard to academic standard. Now, for the lay man it can be helpful for someone who does not depend on factual information, HOWEVER for anyone doing any kind of academic research it is just about the worst source you can use next to geocities home pages or myspace blogs.



I actually had someone tell me that the reason i should use it is because its the only option other than doing your own original research. riiiiiiight. This moron assumes that wikipedia participates in original research, of course, not the case. All of the information found on wikipedia can be confirmed or denied by outside academically credible source.



My question from day one has always been, If you have to cross reference wikipedia to be sure of its accuracy, why not skip the middleman and go directly to the source of wikipedia's information, the academic source, without having to worry about tom dick or harry embelishing their own thoughts as fact?



There is a severe price to pay for this so-called convienence, stupidity

Answer 11

Yes I'd appreciate the info on wikipedia thank you.



before wikipedia I would take long hours googling for info and I would find many excellent sites created by specialists on the subject.



wikipedia has really made me lazy... I sometimes wonder if I'd be better without it, but hell it is so convenient!

Answer 12

Yes. It's good for some basic informations