View Single Post
Old 12-10-2014, 05:15 AM   #7
HarryT
eBook Enthusiast
HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
HarryT's Avatar
 
Posts: 85,557
Karma: 93980341
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shades View Post
Wikipedia can be wrong sometimes, but moderators are usually quick to correct errors. Wikipedia gets a lot of flak for being inaccurate when in reality that's just false. Articles are looked after very fastidiously. This is why the above link says Wiki and Britannica have similar figures when it comes to inaccuracy.

Also, Wikipedia is updated constantly and will usually contain the latest information on a subject.
The problem for academic use is not accuracy, but attribution. In an academic reference you need to be able to say who said something. You generally can't do that with Wiki, because authors are not attributed.

I'm doing a part-time degree in Egyptology, and we are not permitted to use Wiki as a reference source.
HarryT is offline   Reply With Quote