Perhaps I should have said "people that distrust the Wikipedia model." Fact checking is definitely your responsibility as well as an important part of anything you read online. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability which makes this much easier. Any statements that are not verifiable should of course be taken with a grain of salt. The content should of course be scrutinized in the same way anything you read should be scrutinized.
Regarding inaccuracies and claims of suppression, Wikipedia has been found to be as accurate as the Encyclopedia Britannica and your distrust of it's model stems from a lack of understanding of it's policies and is not some kind of conspiracy to cover up the truth. Without even knowing what article, what statement, or what scientific journal you're referring to, I can assume with a good level of certainty that you were probably trying to cover up a significant viewpoint in order to advance a position through your own original research and synthesis of published material. This would necessarily lower the value of an encyclopedia article and, ironically, make it less trustworthy. It's important to understand something before discrediting it. However, if this is of no interest to you I can recommend others that universally hold the same opinions of Wikipedia as your own. They are: - creationists - people who easily buy into conspiracy theories - people who don't believe in the theory of evolution - people who buy into new age beliefs about quantum physics and movies like "What the Bleep do we Know!? Down the rabbit hole." ...etc On Dec 28, 2007 12:21 PM, Jake Ludington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > I am always wary of people that distrust Wikipedia as it reveals a lot. > > It might simply reveal that they actually fact-checked more than one > article > and found Wikipedia to be packed with inaccuracies. In some cases, > attempting to participate in Wikipedia and correct those accuracies is shut > down by the powers that be in the Wikipedia hierarchy, even with > irrefutable > scientific proof in hand. > > Blindly trusting Wikipedia is just as stupid as blindly trusting anything > else. > > > Jake Ludington > > http://www.jakeludington.com > >
