Date: 2006-09-19 07:24 pm (UTC)
barakta: (Default)
From: [personal profile] barakta
I actually like wikipedia a great deal, mainly as a readable (most of the time) thing for randomness - where one just follows links between pages and can hop from subject to subject...

I wouldn't use it as an authoritative source for anything, but as a first-line of information it is useful to get a handle on something quickly. Some wikipedia pages have useful links on them, which are pointing at authoritative and more in-depth sources of information.

I definitely agree it would be nice if there was a system of marking contentious information contained in wikipedia articles, and perhaps a scale of contentiousness vs acceptedness. So the reader could see that the article was in flux (see discussion/talk pages) or something which doesn't really have contentiousness...

I find wikipedia useful to point complete newbies to a subject at, so I have pointed random bloggers at geeky computer things (such as traceroute and what it does and why, which was written from a point of not much knowledge) and for my mum who is a primary school teacher who does 'projects' or has to swot up and provide teaching materials on a completely new subject with very little time to do research.
(will be screened)
(will be screened if not validated)
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org

Profile

ciphergoth: (Default)
Paul Crowley

January 2025

S M T W T F S
   1234
5678 91011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jan. 4th, 2026 09:50 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios