3 ms·
I think wikipedia could be saved by not being it a necessary condition to have a secondary* source. I can't remember the article (or maybe it was more than one
by VirusNewbie 4y ago
I think wikipedia could be saved by not being it a necessary condition to have a secondary* source. I can't remember the article (or maybe it was more than one), but I distinctly remember having an article cited that used a youtube interview as a source. The article then butchered the quote and extrapolated on the content of the video, and that was cited, despite the fact that you could see the actual content of the video itself!