Re: Using Wikipedia as an "authoritative" source

Subject: Re: Using Wikipedia as an "authoritative" source
From: John Cornellier <jcornellier -at- abingdon -dot- oilfield -dot- slb -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 16:05:31 +0100

The article ref'd in the original post

seems to judge Wikipedia against conventional encyclopedias.

Ed Wurster wrote:
>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.


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
Re: Using Wikipedia as an "authoritative" source: From: Ed Wurster

Previous by Author: RE: Training Materials vrs User's Guides/Online Help
Next by Author: MathML - anyone using?
Previous by Thread: Re: Using Wikipedia as an "authoritative" source
Next by Thread: Plugins for Visio conversion to PDF

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

Sponsored Ads