[projectaon] Re: Wikipedia
- From: Daniel Wall <wallphoenix@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 21:19:37 -0700 (PDT)
On the other hand, people who know about something usually have an impressive
urge to share that knowledge, so the very fact that anyone can alter a
wikipedia page means that, more often than not, people in the know have come by
and made sure the information is largely accurate.
That and good wikipedia articles cite piles of sources that you can check for
yourself, if you want.
Dan W, who apologizes for somewhat derailing the topic.
Visit Tower of the Sun!
http://www.towerofthesun.com/lonewolf/index.php
----- Original Message ----
From: Hooligans in Kilts <hooligans_in_kilts@xxxxxxxxx>
To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2008 4:19:50 PM
Subject: [projectaon] Re: serial comma
I'm sorry, I have an issue with people who use Wikipedia. If you are going to
cite a source, how about one that is reliable? Wikipedia is barely monitored
and anyone can go in and make changes to whatever they want to. Use an edu,
gov, or a org site if you are going to use one. com sites are commercial, and
net sites are just domains on a network, which can be linked to certain
organizations or businesses.
Sorry, I am not flaming this person (I hope), I just can't stand it when, like
I said, people use unreliable sources as a good source of information.
____________________________________________________________________________________
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total
Access, No Cost.
http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
Other related posts:
- » [projectaon] Re: Wikipedia