REF: Wikipedia, Sources and Citations

Steve opined: 

<<As it goes, whether using a book as a resource, or the web,  check and 
double check the information you find. If sources are not cited,  than any 
information is
suspect, unless you trust the author of said  information. >>
 
Generally any good source will also cite his/her sources, who will cite  
their sources and so back to a seminal source, so no source really stands  alone. 
 
In following sources back on some subjects it is possible to pinpoint the  
time in which bogus information or misinterpretation or radical new  
interpretations entered the picture. Our understanding of history or science,  or life, 
is always, as the philosophers might say, in a state  of Becoming.
 
Which is just an observation. My real intent in posting this is to  change 
the subject line.  
 
In passing, I will note that the Wikipedia article to which I called  the 
attention of the curious does indeed cite a reference. Whether it  is considered 
a reliable source, or was so considered when the entry  was written, and 
whether the source addresses the question in the entry  that interested me 
directly, and persuasively, is another set of questions.  

The thing about Wiki is that if someone thinks they know better, they  can, 
and are supposed to, revise the entry. One might say Wiki is also in a  state 
of Becoming. 
 
Cordially,
 
Anner Whitehead
Richmond VA USA

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index