Commenting has been turned off for this post
Brian's avatar

Wikipedia is a great place to get quick facts on a subject (such as, for example, how many games a sports team won in 1989) or even as a place to start more in-depth research into something bigger. But it has never been a place to get verified and trusted information, especially on controversial or disputed subjects, and anyone using it as such is, quite frankly and harshly, either naive, a sucker or an idiot.

Because it is sourced from unverified contributors and anonymous editors, Wikipedia has never qualified as a legitimate source or reference for real research or documentation. In fact, my first task when I once started a new job was to go back and scrub half a dozen reports for unviable references. More than 80% of those citations that needed to be removed or edited were from Wikipedia.

That said, up until I read Larry Sanger's comments on Wikipedia being shot through with partisan bias, I had been an annual (though small) contributor. I figured it was worth a few bucks per year has often as I had used it.

Expand full comment
Betty McDonald's avatar

The irony is that privileged and "educated" students at an elite university, who thought they were defending the cause of downtrodden Palestinians, abused those who clean up after them. What hypocrites. God bless these janitors who will soon never have to push a broom or clean a toilet again. Poetic justice.

Expand full comment
197 more comments...

No posts