- Feb 22, 2017
- 106,911
- 36,655
- 2,290
NopeIt's OK for stuff that isn't political. Otherwise, it can't be trusted.Wrong. I have told many people over the years on many forums that Wikipedia isn't a secure site and not a scholarly source. The only person whining here is you, as usual. You really need to find your comfort level. You're outmatched.Just giving you some advice f from experience. Wikipedia isn't accepted by scholars or professors because it can be edited. That means it's not a reliable source of information. Go ahead and keep using it. No skin off my nose.
poor little snowflake reduced to whining about the source!
I honestly pity you.
This is not an academic setting, it is a discussion forum. It is used by people 1000 times a day on this forum and you have never whined about it before.
So many ancient history and space topics are flooded with misinformation and speculation.
Garbage site
How Accurate Is Wikipedia?
In 2005, the peer-reviewed journal Nature asked scientists to compare Wikipedia's scientific articles to those in Encyclopaedia Britannica—"the most scholarly of encyclopedias," according to its own Wiki page. The comparison resulted in a tie; both references contained four serious errors among the 42 articles analyzed by experts.
And last year, a study published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology found that Wikipedia had the same level of accuracy and depth in its articles about 10 types of cancer as the Physician Data Query, a professionally edited database maintained by the National Cancer Institute.