Pantagathus Posted August 2, 2006 Report Share Posted August 2, 2006 This was entirely too funny not to mention here. Especially since we have all had so many run ins with Wikipedia... THE WORD - Videos Watch as many as you like but please watch the one labelled "Wikiality" first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pertinax Posted August 2, 2006 Report Share Posted August 2, 2006 "bringing democracy to knowledge" :bag: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Octavius Posted August 2, 2006 Report Share Posted August 2, 2006 Nice one, :notworthy: Your Greekness! Hope those beings inhabiting the wrong coast take a peak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pantagathus Posted August 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2006 My sides were hurting so bad last night when I saw that. Sad thing of course is how true it is... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docoflove1974 Posted August 2, 2006 Report Share Posted August 2, 2006 I need to be able to download that, and show it to my students. It's a constant fight with college kids...they hear in high school that they can, and should, use Wikipedia...without realizing that they aren't always going to be able to trust the information on there. Crazy...like Fox News Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlapse Posted August 2, 2006 Report Share Posted August 2, 2006 That show kills me, even if I think that sometimes he's in the same boat as the some of the groups he makes fun of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerfectimusPrime Posted August 9, 2006 Report Share Posted August 9, 2006 (edited) I don't understand what's this "wikipedia cannot be trusted" thing is about. I've used wikipedia for quite a long time, and there only few cases of severe errors that I've been exposed to. People often - way too often - use it as an excuse when they cannot present any real arguements, they instead attack on the source; wikipedia, and point out it's alleged unreliability. On certain topics, contriversial historical, or current political topics, you should use multiple sources, but then again, that is obvious with any source in the internet. Edited August 9, 2006 by PerfectimusPrime Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Octavius Posted August 9, 2006 Report Share Posted August 9, 2006 (edited) I don't understand what's this "wikipedia cannot be trusted" thing is about. I've used wikipedia for quite a long time, and there only few cases of severe errors that I've been exposed to. Oh, dear me! Unfortunately you have exposed yourself to some wiseacre :smartass: who would injudiciously, undiplomatically, and undeservedly declare: "And it shows". :wub: Edited August 9, 2006 by Gaius Octavius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerfectimusPrime Posted August 9, 2006 Report Share Posted August 9, 2006 I don't understand what's this "wikipedia cannot be trusted" thing is about. I've used wikipedia for quite a long time, and there only few cases of severe errors that I've been exposed to. Oh, dear me! Unfortunately you have exposed yourself to some wiseacre :smartass: who would injudiciously, undiplomatically, and undeservedly declare: "And it shows". :wub: I'm actually somewhat confused by the meaning of your post? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Octavius Posted August 9, 2006 Report Share Posted August 9, 2006 Pfts P., what, in particular, leaves you in a state of confusion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlapse Posted August 9, 2006 Report Share Posted August 9, 2006 I'm actually somewhat confused by the meaning of your post? Pssst... join the club... Wikipedia does contain some valuable stuff, but anything politically related should be taken with a grain of salt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Octavius Posted August 9, 2006 Report Share Posted August 9, 2006 (edited) Pfts P. & Moon.: Braccae tuae aperiuntur! Edited August 9, 2006 by Gaius Octavius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlapse Posted August 9, 2006 Report Share Posted August 9, 2006 Ergo bibamus! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Octavius Posted August 9, 2006 Report Share Posted August 9, 2006 Tenga nu bechere 'e vin' riente 'a man mo, e te salute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Dalby Posted August 10, 2006 Report Share Posted August 10, 2006 Tenga nu bechere 'e vin' riente 'a man mo, e te salute. Enjoy your drink, but I agree with PerfectimusPrime. There's a lot of good stuff on Wikipedia, as there is on this forum. Wherever you get information from, you have to consider whether it's true. If it matters to you, you have to try to verify it. And if you are relying on any source, Wikipedia or /Der kleine Pauly/ (as I did in a posting here yesterday) or the Encyclopedia Britannica or Pliny, you cite it. It's true that given the way Wikipedia works there is a category of articles that can't be held stable. Articles such as: 'Cathars', 'Jimbo Wales', 'Saladin' and (since the Colbert report, and for some reason which since I'm not an American I will probably never understand) 'Elephant'. Well, bad luck. If you go to Wikipedia for these, you may be disappointed. And if you go to the Dictionary of National Biography for women's history and black history you may be disappointed. It's not the end of the world. And those who come to this forum for mottos for tattooing, are advised to add the letters UNRV after the motto. Always cite your source! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.