Wikipedia != Authoritative?

Wikipedia != Authoritative?

Posted by CmdrTaco on Sunday September 05, @10:02AM
from the well-duh-people dept.
Frozen North writes "Recently, this article in the Syracuse Post-Standard caused a stir by dismissing Wikipedia as an authoritative source, and even suggesting that it was a little deceptive by looking too much like a "real" encyclopedia. Techdirt suggested an experiment: insert bogus information into Wikipedia, and see how long it takes for the mistake to be removed. Well, I did that experiment, and the results weren't good: five errors inserted over five days, all of which lasted until I removed them myself at the end of the experiment."

 [Slashdot:]

This has been causing a hub-bub in the library community for tha past couple of weeks.  Geez, I always beleive everything I read on the Internet;-)  C'mon, Wikipedia is a community website with lots of contributors, of course it is going to be inaccurate at points.  I think the thing is that people need to keep in mind where this stuff is coming from.  Always verify your sources, or else it's just a rumor.

12:36:50 PM