Re: Using Wikipedia as an "authoritative" source

Subject: Re: Using Wikipedia as an "authoritative" source
From: Ed Wurster <glassnet -at- gmail -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 06:50:25 -0400

On 10/20/05, Sean Hower <hokumhome -at- freehomepage -dot- com> wrote:

> Maybe I'm wrong on this, but has anyone actually said that Wikipedia was an
> authoritative source on any topic? Sure, people have said that they use it, but
> has anyone said that Wikipedia is their ONLY source of information and that
> they trust it 100%?

No one has said that. It's just a topic to toss around.

Ed Wurster (Voorhees, NJ)
Tech Tips Blog


Try WebWorks ePublisher Pro for Word today! Smooth migration of legacy
RoboHelp content into your new Help systems. EContent Magazine Decision-
maker review (October 2005) is here:

Doc-To-Help 2005 converts RoboHelp files with one click. Author with Word or any HTML editor. Visit our site to see a conversion demo movie and learn more.

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.


re: Using Wikipedia as an "authoritative" source: From: Sean Hower

Previous by Author: Re: "^p" equivalent in Notepad?
Next by Author: Re: Network files run amuk...
Previous by Thread: re: Using Wikipedia as an "authoritative" source
Next by Thread: Re: Using Wikipedia as an "authoritative" source

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads