Wiki

xelasnave · #1 07-04-2023, 05:03 PM

How good is wiki?

Personally I love it but somecfolk say the most unkind things...I think it is reasonably reliable and hopefully truthful on the basis that failure to be truthful about exposing folk would bring Law suits..someone said it was controlled by the Chinese government and that schools wont let students use it...that seems wrong but then what do I know?

I really look forward to any informed opinion on this matter...

I hold the view that they are ok but perhaps a starting point for research.

Alex

glend (Glen) · #2 07-04-2023, 10:08 PM

What isn't controlled by by some country, vested interest, church, etc.
How do they decide who will control What? Is there an international control committee that says who gets What?

AI will eventually get control.

I can't even control my bladder.

pmrid (Peter) · #3 07-04-2023, 11:24 PM

I empathise with Glen's bladder.

Alex, I suppose your question is about Wikipedia. My understanding is that it is owned/controlled by a Wikipedia Foundation registered in the US as a non-profit. I don't believe there is any public or private ownership outside the Foundation itself though.

As for Chinese control, I'm sceptical. It may be that it is open to manipulation by State and Non-State actors and I'd be surprised if it was not a target for many such.

As for schools banning it -let me say that in my years designing and delivering Post-Grad courses for lawyers in different partes of Asia, I encountered levels of plagiarism that required a lot of disciplinary action against students - and very often, this behaviour involved students using cut-and-paste from Wikipedia and a whole parade of other sources to fatten out their assignments. And very, very often, apart from the sin of plagiarism, I regularly found the referenced material was just plain wrong. So I can well understand why schools have tried to supres this kind of skullduggery.

xelasnave · #4 08-04-2023, 12:32 AM

Thanks very much gentlemen..
Alex

glend (Glen) · #5 08-04-2023, 02:07 AM

Peter, but where does this brave new world of AI leave academia? If AI is used to author papers, there is very likely to be sources, such as Wikipedia buried in the document.

pmrid (Peter) · #6 08-04-2023, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glend

Peter, but where does this brave new world of AI leave academia? If AI is used to author papers, there is very likely to be sources, such as Wikipedia buried in the document.

Undoubtedly. I’m glad it is behind me.

xelasnave · #7 08-04-2023, 11:16 AM

Hi Peter.

Please tell me that it is modestly reliable...I get the feeling that it may be lacking but also that it is a good introduction ..certainly there are plenty of references to additional material...I can not see what there is notv to like.... I like the way it covers people..their background and if they hold conspiracy views, anti climate change views, or are anti vax mad, ,,,one chap that someone told me was a great economist turned out to have defrauded investors 700 million and served 11 years jail..he does not get a second chance with me so I dont think he was a good economist..and wiki alerted me that he went to jail...now folk like him don't have a good word to say about WIKI and I suspect that I know why..but if wiki reported that incorrectly they could be successfully sued so one must assume they have got it correct.

Perhaps Peter you may care to suggest a better encyclopedia that you think would suit me..ones with lots of photos..

In hope you are going Well.

Alex

pmrid (Peter) · #8 08-04-2023, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xelasnave

Hi Peter.

Please tell me that it is modestly reliable...

It's moderately reliable. It's fine for basic information provided you don't rely upon it entirely.

And if you're writing a thesis and you anticipate critical peer review, don't. It's no substitute for proper research through peer-reviewed journals and the like.

If you're readng to get a basic understanding of a subject, sure, go ahead.

xelasnave · #9 09-04-2023, 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pmrid

It's moderately reliable. It's fine for basic information provided you don't rely upon it entirely.

And if you're writing a thesis and you anticipate critical peer review, don't. It's no substitute for proper research through peer-reviewed journals and the like.

If you're readng to get a basic understanding of a subject, sure, go ahead.

Thank you Peter..that is where I had placed it from reading stuff over the years...and I really appreciate to be able to enjoy your expert input.

Alex

Leo.G (Leo) · #10 09-04-2023, 10:45 AM

It used to be anyone with an account could edit anything and I had arguments with several members on a forum years ago when Wiki was very young who were showing equations for electronics and had them all wrong, equations they got from Wiki.
I spent years studying electronics and still have several thousand dollars worth of text books here (new value not now value, what's a book?) and these people would go off stating I was taught incorrectly by those who wrote the books incorrectly without any kno0wledge and Wiki was the knowledge God.

Thankfully it seems a lot more reliable now and I even donate whenever I get an email.
I don't use it a lot but the idea is a good one.

iborg (Philip) · #11 09-04-2023, 11:28 AM

Hi All

Quite some time ago, I recall coming across information from a study that had demonstrated that Wikipedia was marginally more accurate than Encyclopedia Britannica (yes, it still exists!).

I think that at the time, the expected reason was that the current version was more up to date.

Philip

xelasnave · #12 09-04-2023, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leo.G

It used to be anyone with an account could edit anything and I had arguments with several members on a forum years ago when Wiki was very young who were showing equations for electronics and had them all wrong, equations they got from Wiki.
I spent years studying electronics and still have several thousand dollars worth of text books here (new value not now value, what's a book?) and these people would go off stating I was taught incorrectly by those who wrote the books incorrectly without any kno0wledge and Wiki was the knowledge God.

Thankfully it seems a lot more reliable now and I even donate whenever I get an email.
I don't use it a lot but the idea is a good one.

Thank you Leo for taking your time to provide your expert input...

I am rather happy that WIKI is not as bad as some insist and also very happy that I was more or less on the money... I donate when asked because and get excellent value for the way I use it.. which is not knowing a damn thing but going in I always find a decent introduction to the things I am trying to find out about..I absolutely love " the words in bkue" and have wandered for hours starting on a subject and clicking a blue word that takes me off to say someone related to the subject but when I read about him I find he is interested in working mules and from working mules may end up in the history of hide tanning...and I just love what I guess we could in this context call trivia...

What I am entirely confident about is that folk, who critise it outside folk such as yourself who correctly demand a high level of accuracy in matters where there is no room to wiggle, have articles on WIKI pointing out their past crimes, odd ball behaviour, links to rat bag groups, extreme political affiliations that they prefer to be kept the background, or in General " exposed" together with their " sheep" who I suspect are just too dumb to ever reference any encyclopedia but happy to repeat a nonsense sound bite that WIKI is no good...and you can bet these sheep never ever try to judge WIKI using their own personal inspection.

AND so WIKI seems like enemy number one to the conspiracy types, anti vax liars, climate change sceptics, and climate change " deniers" and far right wing types who think the government will take their guns and put the populaion in concentration camps...utter nutters to be specific...

Alex

alpal · #13 09-04-2023, 04:37 PM

I like Wiki but it's too difficult to edit if you find something
that is not quite right or unclear.
You get blocked from editing.
e.g.
Try and edit this page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newtonian_telescope

cheers
Allan

xelasnave · #14 12-04-2023, 08:53 AM

I have not tried to edit but I think that the fact such is possible is such a wonderful thing...

Alex

Leo.G (Leo) · #15 12-04-2023, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xelasnave

Thank you Leo for taking your time to provide your expert input...

I'm no expert and Wiki has evolved significantly from what is was like back in 2004-2008.

Quote:

Originally Posted by xelasnave

AND so WIKI seems like enemy number one to the conspiracy types, anti vax liars, climate change sceptics, and climate change " deniers" and far right wing types who think the government will take their guns and put the populaion in concentration camps...utter nutters to be specific...

Alex

Ah, you know me so well!

My previous bad experiences were dating back to the early naughties. Now I reference Wiki often and I've found it to be exceptionally good with the weird stuff I find interesting and just want a quick overview of. It seems I forget as I read now so reading complex studies on items of interest becomes too confusing.
Though many Wiki articles now provide ample information for my fleeting interests, usually with a high level of accuracy.