Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
The sources of the data are clearly referenced and are reputable. Why comment on something that you've not taken the trouble to look at?
|
Because Wikipedia has a reputation for shenanigans that is fully earned.
They have happened often enough to be wary of the whole site.
It's a site useful for information on fluff entertainment subjects.
It is generally reliable for nothing else.
Discussing the actual details of Wikipedia 's many flaws and duplicities should probably be related to it's own thread, and that thread should be in the religion and politics section.