User:LarryTheShark
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- Wikipedia is a resourceful and reliable tool to use when wanting information on non-controversial subjects:
- "A 2005 investigation in Nature showed that the 42 science articles they compared came close to the level of accuracy of Encyclopædia Britannica.[1]" (Wikipedia)
(Wikipedia:Neutral point of view)
- Wikipedia is not a resourceful and reliable tool to use when wanting information on controversial subjects:
- "The fact that Wikipedia explicitly is not designed to provide correct information about a subject, but rather only present the majority “weight” of viewpoints creates omissions which can lead to false beliefs based on incomplete information.[2][3][4]" (Criticism of Wikipedia)
(Wikipedia:Consensus)
- "Thanks for your efforts, but really, you are wasting your time trying to fight the cabal, or 'Guerrilla Skeptics' as they like to call themselves. You might be interested to watch their instructional video on 'how to impose your own PoV on to a wikipedia page' (that's not its official title, but that's what it's all about..)" Brian Josephson (Source)
- "As the Guerrilla Skeptics have demonstrated, Wikipedia can easily be subverted by determined groups of activists, despite its well-intentioned policies and mediation procedures." Rupert Sheldrake (Source)
