What do you think of Wikipedia?

[chitown]

Do you think it is accurate and reliable?

Do you use it?
Are there any other online encyclopedias that you use or feel are better?

Is there anything online like the old Encarta Encyclopedia?

What is the best free accurate information provider out there.

TIA!

[tuferguson]

not bad as a starting point but would never use it for something important as the "facts" can be very very wrong. the so called guardians are dick heads mostly who are more interested in protecting their territory than stopping abuse or correcting mistakes.

[chitown]

Any other suggestions?

I was going to join this one - Questia - The Online Library of Books and Journals

But it is about $20 a month for it.

[AntRobertson]

I use it quite often to check out movies. I find it a quicker and easier reference than the dedicated review sites plus it often gives precises for all of them.

Other than that as a reference it's certainly open to abuse. But on the other hand immediately dismissing something simply because it's from there is folly too - often the articles are backed up by in-depth articles, references etc.

[FlyFree]

Accurate enough for passing reference. A very useful concept for non-academic use. If you're serious about the subject, it's not reliable enough.

[Plan B]

Depends on whether the subjects you're looking up are technical or opinion based.

Some of the geekier computer stuff is really good, especially if it's well linked with related subjects. Can get lost in there quite easily, with multiple wiki windows open.

After watching a "based on a real life story" movie often like to also look it up and see what the real life story actually was.

[chitown]

Looking mostly for historical facts.

[FlyFree]

^^Haven't looked, but I'd imagine it's very good on the geeky stuff.

[slackula]

It's great for a quick check or for wiling away some time but it is susceptible to vandalism, although steps are being taken to reign that in.

It has already knocked Encarta out of business and I think that over time it will improve.

Although there have been some well publicised incidents of unqualified people writing on subjects they know little or nothing about there are also evidently some highly qualified people maintaining very interesting and detailed parts of it.

A useful resource that should always be taken with a pinch of salt, especially on political or pop-culture topics.

[aging one]

Originally Posted by tuferguson

not bad as a starting point

Exactly, you can then search on your own or if you are lazy check out the links in blue.

[BigRed]

Originally Posted by slackula

A useful resource that should always be taken with a pinch of salt, especially on political or pop-culture topics.

Ok, you have to take it with a pinch of salt, but what reference material doesn't that apply to? history books are written by the winners, Lonely Planet perhaps? the bible or Darwin?

[Butterfly]

for very technical questions, it's quite a nice source to understand or read quickly

I use it a lot for statistics and other scientific theories etc...

[chassamui]

Inconsistent, unreliable and plagued by vandals. Not to be trusted for serious academic study.
It has it's uses, but genuine research is not one of them.

[DrB0b]

Originally Posted by Butterfly

for very technical questions, it's quite a nice source to understand or read quickly

I use it a lot for statistics and other scientific theories etc...

We know. It's very, very obvious

[chassamui]

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Quote: Originally Posted by Butterfly for very technical questions, it's quite a nice source to understand or read quickly I use it a lot for statistics and other scientific theories etc...

Thank you Buttfly, for admitting publicly to being a complete moron.

[Butterfly]

^ you 2 are fucking genius, aren't you ? for the record, they have very nice summary of scientific theories, statistics etc... probably too complex for you two to understand any of it, hence you jumping to silly conclusions.

Try reading the Strings Theory section, and maybe you can comment on what's been reported wrong without looking at the "comments" section or "dispute" sections ? trying reading the Laplace distribution, Binomial Distribution, Regression Analysis, Serial Correlation, and let me know where you find errors and which part is inaccurate, if you can even understand any of it at all, which I highly doubt.

silly little tards

[Butterfly]

Originally Posted by chassamui

Inconsistent, unreliable and plagued by vandals.

and you can make that claim because you know every facts disputed or reported on Wiki ? aren't you a pretty walking encyclopedia

[The Fresh Prince]

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

I use it quite often to check out movies.

I use The Internet Movie Database (IMDb) for that.