\-- > > Wikipedia is not considered as a credible source of reference in > academic circles. >
True and I consider that a monopoly. Just like the closed source people used to call OS s/w more prone to attacks. Only in the case of information there is no check as of date. How can one be sure that what is published in a journal or an encyclopedia is true and correct? For journals its peer review, which is actually much much rigorous in case of Wiki. Encyclopedias - I;m not sure, but even they are just compilation by a few people nothing as broad as the Wiki. In fact neither of them give any disclaimer as to which information might be questionable, where as Wiki does that too. So, anyways we are digressing. -- Lots o' Luv, Phani Bhushan Let not your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right - Isaac Asimov (Salvor Hardin in Foundation and Empire) Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html -- Mailing list guidelines and other related articles: http://lug-iitd.org/Footer
