Off Topix: Embrace the Unexpected in Every Discussion
Off Topix is a well established general discussion forum that originally opened to the public way back in 2009! We provide a laid back atmosphere and our members are down to earth. We have a ton of content and fresh stuff is constantly being added. We cover all sorts of topics, so there's bound to be something inside to pique your interest. We welcome anyone and everyone to register & become a member of our awesome community.
Do you think Wikipedia is a reliable source?
- Thread starter Olivia
- Start date
Its like word of mouth information. I know when I am chatting with people IRL, the stuff they are saying might be incorrect.
Yes, in my experience Wikipedia has been a very good and up-to-date source. Sure, jerks can mess with it, but overall my vote is yes. And, like Neb says, if it's something that really matters to me and needs other sources I'll do that.
Wikipedia annoys me at times. Their idea of 'notable' is very skewed. For instance, in the birth and death lists, they list people like Hitler's sister who is famous only by association. As evil as her brother was, he was at least legitimately famous. Also they include reality idiots and when listing what someone was famous for they sometimes include something for which they are not famous.
Its like word of mouth information. I know when I am chatting with people IRL, the stuff they are saying might be incorrect.
Yes, when talking to someone in real life what they tell you could either be correct or incorrect just like Wikipedia.
Wikipedia greatly annoys me.
It CAN be, but you have to be very careful with it. I have had my fair share of embarrassing experiences because I trusted it too much.
And, as a rule of thumb, I don't dare quoting it without doing my own, separated research if the topic is broader and/or more controversial than average.
And, as a rule of thumb, I don't dare quoting it without doing my own, separated research if the topic is broader and/or more controversial than average.
