3 ms·
The fundamental problem with Wikipedia is that reading one article edited by a dozen people with different perspectives and opinions is just not as illuminating
by photochemsyn 2y ago
The fundamental problem with Wikipedia is that reading one article edited by a dozen people with different perspectives and opinions is just not as illuminating as reading a dozen articles, each written by one person.
That's why all serious researchers need access to the primary literature, original research reports, reviews of collections of reports, all clearly attributed to known sources. If you're working in the field you'll also know about the biases of the lead figures and can take that into account in your reading. Wikipedia is a mess in comparison, it's just for entertainment.
- beezlewax 2y agoExcept wikipedia provides their sources also.. meaning you can go read that material.
- Timwi 2y agoWikipedia only provides a small subset of sources which it arbitrarily deems “reliable” by some arcane definition that flies in the face of what everyday normal people mean by “reliable”. It does the same with “notability”, so most topics don’t even make it into Wikipedia because they are deemed “not notable” when by every reasonable everyday standard they are absolutely notable.