Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-11-15/In the news
Discuss this story
To answer this question is quite simple, I do not use it. I think that Wikipedia is a waste of time and it is all fake. It has not been proofed and anyone can put whatever they want on that website. Just because it is there does not mean that it is true. Kids are using this for their homework and book reports, using false information and then getting punished for it in the form of their grades. If it were up to me, I would ban Wikipedia and make everyone used it pay a fine to their community and their teachers for the time they wasted reading whatever the student gave to them.
— aspen
That's not very nice! :P Allmightyduck What did I do wrong? 00:19, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
- Good students know how to use Wikipedia properly (I do all the time), it's the lazy ones that screw up. Grsz11 00:34, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
- Much to my teachers discomfort, I use Wikipedia quite frequently...if they disallow it, I just use the wiki's references to get pretty much exactly the same information, and come out with an end result exactly the same. I've found it's mostly the old-fashioned teachers or the harder classes (AP Language & Composition comes to mind) that tend to ban it from use, but even then the best reason they can give for why is something along the lines of "The information isn't credible." Ks0stm (T•C•G) 03:54, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Consider the source, consider the time, consider the situation. Recently the US had another election, characterised yet again by the worst in assertions and inferences. Sprinkle the above with a few different words, like Democrats, big government, evolution or Fox News, and you can see this kid is a budding politician, simply parroting the common mode they see on TV and heard in the home. The kid obviously has much to fear from being here - they would definitely get in trouble with the 'adults' if they started to compare realities. Shenme (talk) 05:32, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
- Here's a quotation that caught my eye: "Wikipedia is just a bad excuse for Google or Dictionary.com, they want to be like other search engines, but the truth is that they will never be as good as any of the other search engines that have factual information that is very much true and that is verified by reputable indivudials." I'm worried if this kid thinks the information one finds on Google is "factual" and what's on Wikipedia isn't. Powers T 16:33, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
- The sad thing is some of my professors believe exactly that. :( --Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:02, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
- Here's a quotation that caught my eye: "Wikipedia is just a bad excuse for Google or Dictionary.com, they want to be like other search engines, but the truth is that they will never be as good as any of the other search engines that have factual information that is very much true and that is verified by reputable indivudials." I'm worried if this kid thinks the information one finds on Google is "factual" and what's on Wikipedia isn't. Powers T 16:33, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Why is there the head of a man hiding on the left-most edge of the "biggest picture on Wikipedia?" Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:30, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
- As mentioned in the page, find "... having been stitched together from around 56 photographs ..." Shenme (talk) 05:32, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
A rather large oversight in the stitching process. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:37, 16 November 2010 (UTC)