Wikipedia

[76561199628031747]

Do people actually site that place as a source for anything? lmao

[Azuwi]

I do

[Merci]

this question is harmless, there is no need to post it from an alt

[Sir Seanicus, Esq.]

That ♥♥♥♥ hasn't been acceptable since high school.

[Chaosolous]

Seeing as how it's really easy to check the source material, I do yeah. But I check and read the source material too.

I imagine most people won't put in that kind of effort.

Kinda related; the crazy thing is that people will ask AI assistants questions and just blindly take it as truth despite the fact that AI's like GPT and the like are well documented to just make ♥♥♥♥ up.

[B✪✪tsy]

It depends on what I search for. For political stuff these days Wiki just can't be trusted, you have to check other sources further to confirm. Be sure to check if the wiki page has been recently updated and what changes were made to the page.

[Tommy Salami]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Doctor ♥♥♥♥ Respect:

Do people actually site that place as a source for anything? lmao

They do and they almost always have awful opinions trying to state them as facts lol

[ZZZZZ]

usually a reliable source for definitions and math

[Merci]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von The Duce:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Doctor ♥♥♥♥ Respect:

Do people actually site that place as a source for anything? lmao

They do and they almost always have awful opinions trying to state them as facts lol

you seem familiar with that since your views are debunked from a single page from a health service website xd

[Hairy Hands Harry]

Yes. It is 99% accurate. I am going to assume you don't like it because it constantly says something different from what you want to believe.

[Hobbit XIII]

Yes I do.

People who do not like facts will insult the site but fail to provide credible alternatives to the sources that are found on wikipedia often them sinking to insults / name calling.

It is really good for getting specs on machines / militaries etc too.

[Azuwi]

I use it for sport stats or boxing records because there are no other sites that contribute to this, there is one boxing site you have to pay money to see a boxer's stats record but wikipedia shows it for free and has accurate stats on each person fight history.

[76561199628031747]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Hairy Hands Harry:

Yes. It is 99% accurate. I am going to assume you don't like it because it constantly says something different from what you want to believe.

No, if it says the opposite of what i want to believe i just edit the article. Like everyone else does

[Tommy Salami]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Hairy Hands Harry:

Yes. It is 99% accurate. I am going to assume you don't like it because it constantly says something different from what you want to believe.

It's called lying by omission, Henry. Try and keep up.

[Sir Seanicus, Esq.]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Hairy Hands Harry:

Yes. It is 99% accurate. I am going to assume you don't like it because it constantly says something different from what you want to believe.

Nah just edit the article lol.

[Hairy Hands Harry]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Doctor ♥♥♥♥ Respect:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Hairy Hands Harry:

Yes. It is 99% accurate. I am going to assume you don't like it because it constantly says something different from what you want to believe.

No, if it says the opposite of what i want to believe i just edit the article. Like everyone else does

Nope. You can't just do that anymore. And people will immediately change it back to the truth.