Thread: Don't you hate it when people complain & make a fuss when you use wikipedia as a

source? ? It's just as good as any other source people. get a grip.

Yes there is an off-chance it can be modified but any random person but it is known to be 99.999% accurate within a very small margin of error.

It is the quickest & most convenient way to find things, and I am aggravated by all you who complain about me using it.
You so called "professionals" expect me to use a 'research database' omg those things are such pieces of crap, you can't find anything on them.




p.s. don't forget to rate my question as "interesting"
I need the points lol

I do not know about you, but I work with a college faculty (I work on his website, http://www.sciencescene.com/, that is how I know) that uses Wikipedia as a reference. The fact is he says, is that research sites unless you are researcher, you can not understand the abstract anyway. So I am in agreement that sometimes research sites can be over kill for most reports.

The problem is that not everything is written by doctor So and So, but by knowledgeable people on specific areas in layman terms. Because of that, Wikipedia is not given the creditability it should get. First thing educated people look for is the persons credentials.

Yea i know like my history teacher doesn't let us use it and that's stupid. All websites could have fake info.