"...inaccuracies abound ...(and) can come to be regarded as fact..." This is always why Wikipedia should be only a starting point to research, but unfortunately has become the end-point for so many, an easy way out. Related is the question of search: if not among the first 10-20 hits in google, then facts can slip away, thought not to exist. Proper research is a time-intensive, hands-on work; few consider it worthwhile. Web-based research is at best an incomplete venture. Thanks for this post, Richard.
--- On Wed, 11/25/09, Richard P. <richs...@gmail.com> wrote: From: Richard P. <richs...@gmail.com> Subject: [CGUYS] Wikipedia To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM Date: Wednesday, November 25, 2009, 10:00 AM Not sure this is off-topic but is this a sign of the times: http://tinyurl.com/ygeo84p >From The Times November 25, 2009 Wikipedia shows signs of stalling as number of volunteers falls sharply It was one of the internet’s most ambitious, radical and ultimately successful ideas. Eight years ago Wikipedia, the free online encyclopaedia that allows anyone to write and edit articles, declared that it would provide access to “the sum of all human knowledge”. It soon became one of world’s most popular websites. The site assumed that facts and information could be provided by all. Anyone was allowed to log on, write and change articles. Any subject — from Barack Obama’s election to characters in the Star Wars films — was considered worthy of inclusion. The pages have been updated and improved upon thousands of times and they are used more than 300 million times a month by everyone from primary school pupils to speechwriters — even if they should know better. ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
