See, it's an easy resource. It is also often accurate - not always, but enough to make it a relevant resource, despite its numerous authors/contributors. And therefore it works well for this blog. See, this blog is not an academic work - it is not a collection of detailed articles destined for publication in various journals. Its a collection of random observations, of quickly written, would-be topical posts on current political issues (and - yes - music, Doctor Who, films etc). There's a place for exquisitely researched writings. This is not it.
So, yeah, I use Wikipedia. If you don't like it, or don't rate it, or whatever, then go elsewhere.
I find that Wikipedia is accurate if you are looking at technical things. If you look up a personality, however, anything seems to go.
ReplyDeleteThe one reference to me, inaccurate actually, in Wikipedia, is to people using Wikipedia in academic journal articles.
ReplyDeleteYes, I referenced it. It was a part of a (admittedly attempting to be subtle) joke. But not in an academic journal.
This blog was once cited as a reference on a Wikipedia article. About Jack Straw. Pretty sure all I've ever done on this blog was call Straw an authoritarian cunt,
ReplyDeleteAs with almost every source, I think Wikipedia is best treated with a hefty pinch of salt. More often than not I think it is accurate, but if you're reading something that smells like bullshit, it probably is.