You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
31

[–] weezkitty 0 points 31 points (+31|-0) ago 

It is wise to avoid wikipedia for any controversial topic. In fact, it is best to search many sources to get a better picture of the truth

0
20

[–] GenghisSean 0 points 20 points (+20|-0) ago 

That being said, several of their math and computer science articles are wonderful. If it isn't hotly contested (or easily opinionated in general) wikipedia is usually pretty alright.

0
4

[–] weezkitty 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

This is correct. While you shouldn't use Wikipedia as an only source in research, if you want to learn more about a technical/science topic that isn't surrounded by controversy, Wikipedia is plenty good and usually explains concepts well.

0
3

[–] beetusvoater 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Yeah, I recently corrected an article which was plainly false and the change was rapidly approved. But for math there are some more niche wikis, which are in some cases better suited. Then again, the SJW don't have a standing in math, so there is that.

Edit: Minor change

1
0

[–] minicoaster 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

It's almost as if wikipedia has a tag for controversial topics that reminds people about the inherent issues with crowdsourcing articles about those kind of topics.

I don't understand why people get their panties in a bunch over this, what do they really expect?

0
6

[–] 404_SLEEP_NOT_FOUND 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Wikipedia really has always attracted the crazies. I used to (and still do) have a hobby for communist related history. I really appreciate different ideas and how they mold/influence cultures. But there were these nutjobs who edited the communist articles everyday, and got in major fights in the discussion pages. Different kinds. Some would have to get banned (from wikipedia) because they were so militant and difficult to deal with. Others were just annoying and spent their time on religious articles, then went over to the communist articles and trashed them up. The Leon Trotsky article used to be in a great shape thanks to some professors and their spare time. Then in a few months these 2 Mormons just wouldn't stop breaking it up into multiple articles/pages, and making their edits as part of the original article. It used to have history in it, it quickly became a political write-up about how bad communism was/is.

0
0

[–] insensitive ago 

Like the burning of the Library of Alexandria, this irks me.

0
0

[–] RedditSucksNow ago 

Don't the references help determine if the article is a lie?