I find it really tiresome that Wikipedia is used in every other forum conversation (not just on this board, mind you) as some kind of reliable and definitive source. Sure, I've admired the
idea of a free source encyclopaedia ever since I learnt about it, and more often than not it works, but remember that God (which Wikipedia ain't
) is in the details.
This is, of course, a part of a more general problem with people not being skeptical enough about factoids read on the Internet in general, and on the websites created by a crowd of loosely supervised volunteers in specific, but Wikipedia, covering as wide range of subjects as it does, is the most common victim of such misunderstandings.
Please, if you intend to use Wikipedia as a source of argument or information, try to do the following:
- Check if the article names its source. If it does, link to the original source instead. It will be easier to rate its credibility.
- Wikipedia has the talk page and the edits' history for a reason. Consult them. Maybe the content has aleady been questioned by Wiki contributors themselves, in which case helping it spread it any further is perhaps not a reliable thing to do.
- If you are referring to just a small excerpt of the article, quote it here in addition to linking to it. Someone might delete it by tomorrow.
- The more controversial the topic at hand, the more reconsider bringing up Wikipedia at all (especially if you are looking for a definition or an analysis rather than facts). If something starts a heated debate in here, there is no reason to assume that Wiki updater isn't a side in this argument as well.
- As far as rumours and speculations are concerned, simply don't use it. (That's why
)
I'm sorry, I just had to vent.
