3 ms·
That's a good analysis. One extra thing to consider with your model is Wikipedia may or may not be accurate on a topic. I find it's often correct on IT stuff bu
by nickpsecurity 9y ago
That's a good analysis. One extra thing to consider with your model is Wikipedia may or may not be accurate on a topic. I find it's often correct on IT stuff but even that slips on occasion. When using it, I have to check the references and/or corroborate them seeing what turns up in Google.
So, even then it's more like Wikipedia AND Google instead OR.
- Bartweiss 9y agoThis is a good point. I'm generally bullish on Wikipedia, for a lot of topics I don't even worry about cross-referencing. But the safest stuff is a mix of popular and objective (e.g. "who was in that movie again?"). For political, technical, or obscure topics that becomes a much tougher question. The political issue is obvious, but I'm surprised at how often I go into the weeds on something mathematical or simply unpopular and find that Wikipedia is off the mark. I wouldn't trust it for those topics without further Googling.