1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  
    TalkBass.com has been uniting the low end since 1998.  Join us! :)

The Wikipedia appriciation thread!

Discussion in 'Off Topic [BG]' started by Tsal, Oct 5, 2005.

  1. Tsal


    Jan 28, 2000
    Finland, EU
    Now, what would we do without the greatest free web encyclopedia, The Wikipedia? Never has making school essays or getting to know what the hell are those guys talking about been so easy :p

    Personally, I'm ready to consider getting a palm computer just to be able to access Wiki where ever I might roam :bassist:

    Let's hear it for Wiki! Yay!
  2. NJL


    Apr 12, 2002
    San Antonio
    If you use Firefox, there's a little search engine thingy for it you can download.

    As much as I love Wiki....who fills it with info? Just curious and I haven't had a chance to really check into this...

  3. Oysterman


    Mar 30, 2000
    Pretty much anyone can write anything in it:
    As any other source of information, but especially because of the above, it should be used with discretion. It's a cool site, but (as always with the internet), you should at least double-check every bit of information before you even think of trusting it as "fact".
  4. NJL


    Apr 12, 2002
    San Antonio
    Thanks a bunch!

  5. +1
    I love Wikipedia. I have used it for the past few years doing research on ancient and medieval Spanish history and it is a wonderful source. BUT, as Oysterman says, anybody can write anything, so it needs to be used with a great deal of caution. It provides lots of leads that I can use to guide my investigations, but they are only leads until I can verify the info.
  6. Wrong Robot

    Wrong Robot Guest

    Apr 8, 2002
    There have been a handful of notoriously incorrect articles that have the look and appearance of an accurate one(commonly found with current events and other big historical events). But by and large, information you find on wikipedia is pretty good. If you suspect foul play, you can always cross-check the current revision of any article with a previous revision and see if certain facts or information has been changed, which will serve as a guide to help zero in on your own personal research whilst simultaneously improving wikipedia.

    I personally think that it would be a good idea for wiki to 'lock' articles that were definitive enough. What I mean by that is, not make them wholly un-editable, but at least make it so the average lamer couldn't haphazardly change information, and that information changes would have to go through some form of screening. Only for completed articles though. Perhaps that would defeat the spirit of the site somewhat, but it would also help ebb the dubious nature of accuracy.

    I get lost on that site though. Any given article, I'll end up with 10+ tabs within a minute. It's overwhelming.
  7. I can thank Wikipedia for helping me write several papers

    On a really really boring day, I'll look at an article, click on a link within the article, and then repeat over and over. You can lose yourself there for a long time, if you're not careful.
  8. Guilty:)

    It's great because it has a lot of stuff combined (music things that might not make it into books, and stuff about current events). But you have to check everything with a (more) reliable source.