The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> More Reddit WP-suckery
EricBarbour
post Sun 8th January 2012, 10:21pm
Post #1


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



This post speaks volumes.

Just because WP has a (VERY rarely used, much less acknowledged) template for religious articles requiring secondary sources, we're supposed to have "respect" for it.

Read the comment thread, if you have the stomach.

At least some of them have sense:
QUOTE
There are extremely smart ways to use wikipedia, and extremely dumb ways. People over thirty who began to learn the internet when they has already learned common sense know how to use wikipedia, because they read everything with a discerning and critical eye (or at least, they should be). Kids these days read what the internet tells them and believe each word, because they grew up with the internet as sourced content, not bullshit someone shat out of their ass. I'm in academia, and we frequently discuss whether wikipedia is good or bad as a source. It can be great. Just be discerning, critical, and check the fucking sources. If it sounds like crap, it probably is. (Side note: I know there are smart kids and young 20-somethings. There are exceptions to every rule.)

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
EricBarbour   More Reddit WP-suckery   Sun 8th January 2012, 10:21pm
EricBarbour   Here's a new Reddit thread, about the impendin...   Fri 13th January 2012, 8:43pm


Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 22nd 5 13, 4:37pm