Slashdot Mirror
Nitpicking Wikipedia's Vulnerabilities
tiltowait writes "A lot of Wikipedia critics point to hypothetical situations when giving reasons for not valuing the site. Wikipedia even has a 'Replies to common objections' article set up to field these. I'd rather look at some real examples of applying the same level of scrutiny to materials often held up as the Platonic ideal of 'scholarship,' such as peer-reviewed journals, conference papers, established journalism sources, monographs, and print encyclopedias. Even these have disclaimers because they can be can be vandalized or have their reliability and accuracy questioned. As dangerous as it is to trust unverified information, it can be just as bad to make prior judgments discounting information because the source happens to be anonymous. The above examples illustrate that all materials existing along a continuum of valuable information formats. Wikipedia articles can be useful for quickly obtaining factual overviews or as a starting point to further research. But that's just one librarian's opinion. How do tech-savvy people view Wikipedia?"
Ok, what cockbag didn't mark that funny?
The government which is strong enough to protect you from everything is strong enough to take everything from you.
The problem that I have had with Wikipedia is that in editing articles on which I am a recognized expert, I have had my edits and entries entirely removed by others who "feel" that these edits were somehow inappropriate, even when I referenced those entries along with results from peer reviewed journals.
Care to back this up with some examples? No offense, but considering you are in Utah, most famous for a certain religion that holds certain viewpoints quite at odds with mainstream scientific thought, it is within the realm of possibility that the others were correct... As for being in peer reviewed journals, well, there's quite a range of quality there. Were the references from something on the order of _Science_ or _Nature_? Technically, the "Journal of Mormon Thought" is a peer reviewed journal, as it the post-modernist "Social Text".