On Feb 5, 2008 10:03 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 2/6/08, Rich Holton <richholton(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Right, we accept verifiability, not truth. But we work pretty damn hard
not
to educate people with things that we know *not*
to be true.
Actually, we attempt to cover most significant errors made by humanity.
I was trying to be snappy and clever. Obviously I failed.
My point is that we don't intentionally include erroneous information. We do
include information about errors. We do include controversial claims with
references.
But we also include depictions of historical figures that we *know* are
false, that we *know* cannot possibly be true. But we include them on the
article about the person they erroneously depict, as though they accurately
depict them. And at least some people find this "useful".