DeletedUser
To be clear Hellstromm basically said you should be using wiki as a way to find appropriate sources otherwise its a logical fallacy.
To be clear Hellstromm basically said you should be using wiki as a way to find appropriate sources otherwise its a logical fallacy.
DeletedUser
Well, then he has a different opinion on it than but sites like Wikipedia are just a useful tool of summarizing the citations given
DeletedUser
Willy, you have a reading comprehension problem.
"Whether it's Wikipedia, a blog, or an op-ed, attempting to utilize any of these as credible sources is a logical fallacy" ~Me
"if you're quoting Wikipedia as your argument, rather than as a warehouse of information, then you're simply doing it wrong" ~Me
Go reread the original post instead of trying to distort what someone wrote to serve your misguided agenda from a different debate."if you're quoting Wikipedia as your argument, rather than as a warehouse of information, then you're simply doing it wrong" ~Me
DeletedUser
You dismissed Sum on using wiki as a source to provide someone's opinion; however that would be information which you said wiki can be used as a where house for, so which is it?
DeletedUser25606
i'm not really sure why this has turned out to be a thread as such ,but i think what h.s is trying to say (or at least the most straight forward common sense point here would be) , is it's horses for courses , that's to say if the facts you are looking for are say history ,then generally ,wiki would be a good source ,history is history , however ,if the point of topic is one of opinion (or could be taken as opinion), then copying and pasting off wiki and saying it's fact is misleading .
I think wiki for what it is ,is a great reffernce point , and something really good that the internet has given all of us , but there needs to be an awareness that on some subjects (and when i say some ,it's a lot) wiki is definatly not the last word and does dabble from information into opinion , and thats where it gets murky.
I think wiki for what it is ,is a great reffernce point , and something really good that the internet has given all of us , but there needs to be an awareness that on some subjects (and when i say some ,it's a lot) wiki is definatly not the last word and does dabble from information into opinion , and thats where it gets murky.
DeletedUser
Well, no. Wikipedia is a warehouse, in that you can go to it and see summations or excerpts from multiple "sources," which are provided in links or in address to the respective ISBN for a book/magazine at the bottom of each wiki page. However, Wikipedia is not the source, it is not "a" source.
A library is not a source. A particular section in a library is not a source. A particular topic in a library is not a source. Wikipedia is a virtual library.
A library is not a source. A particular section in a library is not a source. A particular topic in a library is not a source. Wikipedia is a virtual library.
DeletedUser
I hardly ever see the need to provide links, sources or references, because if I know something, the source is me, and if I don't know, I shouldn't be posting.
DeletedUser
njubs...
"Everything you read on the internet is true" -Albert Einstein
"Everything you read on the internet is true" -Albert Einstein
DeletedUser
Can't argue with Einstein
DeletedUser
Neils Bohr did, and he was right, too.Can't argue with Einstein
DeletedUser
I don't believe you, where's your source?
DeletedUser
we need sauce!
DeletedUser
It's me. I'm my own source. As if I would be ignorant of the Copenhagen interpretation! Pffft!I don't believe you, where's your source?