On 11 Mar 2010 at 1:25, Allen Esterson wrote: > ?In response to posts on "truth finding" Rick Froman cited Wikipedia > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth > and added "Standard disclaimers apply." > > Has anyone anything more to add? :-)
Yes. Now that it's spreading, I think it's time to give this tiresome and unnecessary "standard disclaimers" warning a rest. And let's give Wikipedia a break as well. No one has shown that Wikipedia is any more unreliable than any other secondary source, in particular other encyclopedias. In fact one small study in _Nature_ suggested Wikipedia did just as well as that celebrated source of all knowledge, Britannica. So unless we're going to label _all_ our secondary sources with this phrase, perhaps we should just retire it. We're big boys and girls. We all understand the need for caution, whatever the secondary source. Singling Wikipedia out has a whiff of condescension about it, the hint that I know better, but you need a reminder. If one really felt that the information provided is so untrustworthy as to require a repeated warning, then why is it being cited at all? OK. Grumpy time over. Standard disclaimers do not apply. Stephen -------------------------------------------- Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Emeritus Bishop's University e-mail: sblack at ubishops.ca 2600 College St. Sherbrooke QC J1M 1Z7 Canada ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=1209 or send a blank email to leave-1209-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
