Comments on: Wikipedia Prankster Exposed — But This Is Only the Beginning http://www.ideagrove.com/blog/2005/12/wikipedia-prankster-exposed-but-this-is-only-the-beginning.html Bringing You Media News, Marketing Views, Celebrity Culture & Political Spin Since February 2005 Sat, 20 Mar 2010 08:25:53 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 By: Anonymous http://www.ideagrove.com/blog/2005/12/wikipedia-prankster-exposed-but-this-is-only-the-beginning.html/comment-page-1#comment-442 Anonymous Sun, 18 Dec 2005 19:51:00 +0000 http://www.ideagrove.com/weblog/?p=453#comment-442 I love wikipedia, even when it's wrong.<br/><br/>Check out this <a HREF="http://www.blinkpop.com" REL="nofollow">joint wikipedia/google search thingy</a><br/>I made for a home page. I love wikipedia, even when it’s wrong.

Check out this joint wikipedia/google search thingy
I made for a home page.

]]> By: dave cormier http://www.ideagrove.com/blog/2005/12/wikipedia-prankster-exposed-but-this-is-only-the-beginning.html/comment-page-1#comment-413 dave cormier Tue, 13 Dec 2005 16:37:00 +0000 http://www.ideagrove.com/weblog/?p=453#comment-413 Wikipedia can be used as A source. Not as THE source. Its open editing policy allows for many voices to get into the production of knowledge that are otherwise left out of the britannica. Much like we don't quote neuroscience from the 1893 edition of britannica, we shouldn't start an operation based on the 2005 entry on neuroscience either. <br/>If someone is looking to wikipedia as a sole source for info, you are making the same mistake as the guy who thought he could use it for a practical joke. It is not a replacement for britannica. It's just another tool, with advantages and disadvantages. Wikipedia can be used as A source. Not as THE source. Its open editing policy allows for many voices to get into the production of knowledge that are otherwise left out of the britannica. Much like we don’t quote neuroscience from the 1893 edition of britannica, we shouldn’t start an operation based on the 2005 entry on neuroscience either.
If someone is looking to wikipedia as a sole source for info, you are making the same mistake as the guy who thought he could use it for a practical joke. It is not a replacement for britannica. It’s just another tool, with advantages and disadvantages.

]]>