--- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > A definition or article found in wikipedia is no more credible than > anything Paul says in this thread, not that you couldn't find a more > credible source with a definition suiting your stand. It would jsut > be better if you used something that had some sort of standard of > quality. >
Not true. At least the Wikipedia is a product of worldwide research and opinion, not just one person's knowledge. An analogous situation is Linux. The operating system has no real direction or control. It is a project of developers worldwide of various skill levels and knowledge. It could easily be more kludgey than Windows has ever been, BUT, the contributors are motivated by the desire to make something that is MORE useful. Similarly, the Wikipedia is a product of a worldwide user base who a motivated by the desire to make something MORE informative. As has been said before, just try to edit some entries with blantantly incorrect facts and see how swiftly the record is set straight. One of the main reasons many Wikipedia articles are more credible than one persdon's opinion is also that the information is frequently backed up with multiple sources. As was the information behind the article I cited. ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
