What about using more than one source - common sense surely?
Anyway sod the NYT - the Guardian leader loves us ;)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/leaders/story/0,3604,1661567,00.html
Caroline/Secretlondon
-----Original Message-----
From: wikipedia-l-bounces(a)Wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Sean Barrett
Sent: 08 December 2005 14:51
To: wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] NYT to forbid use of Wikipedia as a reference?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Anthony DiPierro stated for the record:
I don't understand why people are taking offense
to this in the first
place. In my opinion, *of course* the New York Times shouldn't be
using Wikipedia to check information. Is someone here suggesting that
they should? It seems to me like a ridiculous proposition in the
first place.
Anthony
So should anybody, anywhere, be using Wikipedia for any purpose?
If so, then why are the editors at the New York Times "of course"
different from those that should?
- --
Sean Barrett | Damned shame about Scrooge -- a shrewd
sean(a)epoptic.org | businessman before this lunacy.
| I'm afraid he's for Bedlam now.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -
http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFDmEhAMAt1wyd9d+URAiSoAJ48Gc3wyCZP2kexe2FrtFIbST4ecgCePfC/
grua24Wu6qZLHR4gANbmm1o=
=ZVks
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.12/194 - Release Date: 07/12/2005