--- Slowking Man <slowkingman(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 00:47 -0700, Cheney Shill
wrote:
Interesting. A remarkable insight. So not only
is
Wikipedia not NPOV or trustable, but it's OK because
encylopedias, including textbooks, in general are not
considered reliable sources by higher education. Could
I
get the references that showed that consensus
among
professors also refused other encyclopedias and not
just
Wikipedia? Do they have any findings with regard
to
other
reference sources, such as textbooks and
dictionaries?
like; if Wikipedia were somehow certified as completely
neutral and
reliable by some hypothetical authority, it would still,
as a tertiary
source, be no more appropriate as a cited reference for
the kind of work I'm referring to.
No more appropriate according to what?
As far as data on professors' views of Wikipedia,
I don't
have anything
at my fingertips, but I'm speaking more about a general
principle than
the current views of a majority of professionals in
higher education.
From personal experience, I /can/ state that in
Oh, no more appropriate according to your original,
unsourced, unverifiable personal claims. You're an expert?
A scholar? Essjay also had lots of personal scholarly
experience to share. LOL.
~~Pro-Lick
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/User:Halliburton_Shill
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pro-Lick
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pro-Lick
http://www.wikiality.com/User:Pro-Lick (Wikia supported site since 2006)
--spam may follow--
____________________________________________________________________________________
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay
it on us.
http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7