I think I do because its much quicker.

wikipedia's become one of my most visited places on the internet

Limiter released! Rebellious teenager mode activated. Get the hell out of my way.

For me Wikipedia is the best website on the web. The spread of knowledge over the world is a noble objective.

Je grimperai sur l'espace lumineux,
Je traverserai l'esprit de la terre,
Je cheminerai dans la lumière
Et j'atteindrai l'étoile.

star_princess wrote:

wikipedia's become one of my most visited places on the internet

Ditto, although it can be sometimes prone to the odd spate of online vandalism. :

I myself don't use it much but my niece uses it alot for school assignments.

True friends are hard to find. Especially those you don't judge you for your opinions.

I use Wikipedia for quick reference, although I take anything I read there with a pinch of salt. Some articles can be useful but I always check it with an informed source, especially if it's medical or historically related. There are a lot of intelligent people writing for them but there are also people who take great pleasure in posting untrue facts and information. It's actually been in the news a lot recently because Wiki's owners want teachers to recognise it as a source. A lot of teachers won't recognise it as a reliable source because everyone and anyone can update it as opposed to just qualified experts.

Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate
Currently accepting payment in Cookies and Cheezburgers!
"If there's a new way, I'll be the first in line. But, it better work this time." - 'Peace Sells' - Megadeth

Wikipedia is brilliant!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I use it all the time, and i sometimes translate some articles, because the bad site of Wiki is that there aren't many articles in other foreign languages (not English I mean).

Won't go home without you

I don't have an encyclopedia, so yes, I use wiki much more.

Follow the cloud that looks like a sheep!

They're just jealous ! Those so called experts should better contribute instead of criticizing all the time...

Je grimperai sur l'espace lumineux,
Je traverserai l'esprit de la terre,
Je cheminerai dans la lumière
Et j'atteindrai l'étoile.

Yes, I use Wikipedia much more than I use an encyclopedia. I just love Wikipedia and I think it's one of the best and most useful projects ever made on Internet.

~ "Life is an art work without an eraser" ~

I think I do because its much quicker.

I usually use internet to find answers. But sometimes I use also books

I use wiki a lot. There's a lot of information out there, and most of the times it's up to date. Encyclopedia's are mostly old. Even if they are one year old they are out of time.

...and easier... and you have some links to other pages...

Wikipedia isn't as objective as an Encyclopaedia, but it's easier to access for most people I imagine as you just have to type something in - but I imagine that sums up Wikipedia doesn't it?

If I was doing research I might get ideas from Wiki, but then back it up with research from an Encyclopaedia or another source - but then how objective are other reference books - it's always from someone's perspective...

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people. - V

What makes people so sure encyclopaedias' editors are any more objective than the Wikipedia users are, I wonder...Wikipedia is simply edited much more often.

How can I believe in God when just last week I got my tongue caught in the roller of an electric typewriter? --Woody Allen

British encyclopedia would have us believe that there once was a state called palestine,when in fact there never was,and isnt...

yep i do use wikipedia much more than encyclopedia as its much easy n quick...

yes, I do it's the best answer to all questions I use encarta too .

*sun*

But there will be. And if you are living in Israel rather than diaspora and want peace, then I imagine you would want this to be created, and so it doesn't matter what was there before, what matters is what will be there in the next decades.


If you are argueing only about the name, and would trace the state of Israel back to king david's state in 1000 BC, then you could probably also trace the palestinians back to the philistia state that existed in around 600 BC. (which was roughly the same territory as the gaza strip today).


And yes wikipedia is one of the most useful things on the web, you can learn stuff you are looking for, or even stuff you aren't, but if you surf randomly and try to learn everything, you'll probably get overwhelmed. (-:

I think Wikipedia is a great resource, though like others have mentioned, most instructors (especially at the college/uni level won't recognize it as a legitimate source) I think if you're just using it as a quick reference, it's brilliant.

Keep Smiling!

gintarele191 wrote:

yes, I do it's the best answer to all questions I use encarta too .

I didn't realise that Encarta was still around - I remember using that and finding it very helpful

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people. - V

Uh nice question. Wikipedia.

Although something tells me that at least encyclopedias were a little more and better supervised. Anyways, the future of technology is to make us more dependant of it.

Little to the left.

Wiki is not the best way to take information from, if you are searching for some serious information for you studyies, for ex.
But for getting information quickly and only to look through it, it can be rather useful!

I ONLY look up things in Wikipedia!!

You have more than 30 sources in the article. Each statement is accompanied by a reliable source. Have you ever clicked on those blue small numbers ? We could always see the historic, discuss what was changed and even revert the article back. We could even block changes in the article (Vandalism).

An encyclopedia have no place for opinions : facts and only facts. Some articles have mentions like :

The neutrality of this article is discussed.

This article does not meet requirements...

Stuff like that so the readers won't be lured.

You cannot doubt about the credibility of an article just because it's wikipedia. Prove your allegations instead.

A recent study proved that Wikipedia doesn't contain more mistakes than the Britannica.

People are just jealous of its success.

Je grimperai sur l'espace lumineux,
Je traverserai l'esprit de la terre,
Je cheminerai dans la lumière
Et j'atteindrai l'étoile.

A study by WHO? Present the facts to me instead of ramming it down my throat just because I disagree with you. Despite what you say...wikipedia is not accepted as a credible source. A good example would be that of universities and colleges. If you cite wikipedia as a source of information you run the risk of missing out on marks. Why I hear you scream...because it is considered to be unreliable and not worth the effort.

You're talking like I have invented what I said. Funny...

The study was conducted by Nature. One of the most reliable scientific journals.

http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2005/12/69844

Bonus + : Take what Britannica's staff said to defend themselves. And what Nature's staff to defend themselves against Britannica. You have also the whole study. (1 word file + 2 pdf files)

http://www.vedocci.fr/index.php/archives/2006/03/27/wikipedia-vs-britannica-britannica-pas-daccord/

Je grimperai sur l'espace lumineux,
Je traverserai l'esprit de la terre,
Je cheminerai dans la lumière
Et j'atteindrai l'étoile.

By the way, I could always compare them myself : I have both paper and dvd edition :

To prevent your continuous scepticism :

http://images0.hiboox.com/images/2208/08a4d3da4bf350e33a1c703defddf3e7.jpg

Je grimperai sur l'espace lumineux,
Je traverserai l'esprit de la terre,
Je cheminerai dans la lumière
Et j'atteindrai l'étoile.

Ha-ha, comparing Wikipedia to any Encyclopaedia, is like comparing a Slaughter-man to a Surgeon..

"On the sixth day God created man. On the seventh day, man returned the favour."