[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [debian-user] Re: Wikipedia



On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 10:00:13AM -0600, Ted Hilts <thilts@mcsnet.ca> was heard to say:
> I hope this message is not OT and forgive my ignorance but I received a  
> very informative response to some of my questions and several people  
> recommended that I make better use of everyones time by first going to  
> Wikipedia. The messages were more or less as follows:
>
> See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi_core for more information
>
> So, I am being told by some to use wikipedia as a credible reference for  
> technical questions.
>
> It is my understanding that use of wikipedia may subject the reader to  
> faulty information.  There were several blurbs in the news and in news  
> letters that very clearly indicated a "user beware" warning.  Also,  
> there was recently an internal conflict between several individuals  
> working at wikipedia and the conflict was over the growing content some  
> of which was mis-information and in one case submitted by someone using  
> false credentials.

  Other people covered this, but since I was one of the people who gave
you this advice, I feel that I should echo them a little. :)

  Yes, Wikipedia is not a totally reliable source.  But then, neither is
anything else.  In my experience, Wikipedia articles on technical topics
are a good way of getting a general overview of the subject.  On specific
details they may be wrong, poorly stated, or out of date -- but no more
so than any other source of information (textbooks, magazines,
general-interest books, newspapers, lectures, journal articles, etc...).
If you really want to learn about a technical subject, you'll generally
want to consult multiple independent sources of information to make sure
you're getting a complete picture...but if you just need to get the
general picture, my experience is that Wikipedia is quite reliable.

  Daniel


Reply to: