• unit327@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I downloaded the entirety of wikipedia as of 2024 to use as a reference for “truth” in the post-slop world. Maybe I should grab the 2022 version as well just in case…

      • NiHaDuncan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Wikipedia is the most accurate encyclopedia to date; its perceived unreliability as to its correctness is largely a misunderstanding that arose from misconceptions as to why one can’t (or shouldn’t, depending on case) cite it in academia. People think that it can’t be cited because of its unreliability but in reality it’s simply because it’s a third hand source; i.e. a resource.

        Wikipedia is built near-purely on second hand sources, which is how all encyclopedias are intended to be constructed. As long as one ensures the validity of the second hand source used, encyclopedias are great resources.

        • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Wikipedia is the most accurate encyclopedia to date

          How did you determine that?

          Wikipedia is built near-purely on second hand sources, which is how all encyclopedias are intended to be constructed. As long as one ensures the validity of the second hand source used, encyclopedias are great resources.

          True, but basically nobody does check that the sources are valid, and they often aren’t.

          • Crash@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            How do you know they often aren’t? I’m an academic and regularly use wikipedia to find citations for sources. I’ve have yet to come across any citations that were wrong.