[WikiEN-l] NBC's story on Wikipedia

[SonOfYoungwood at aol.com]

I was very disappointed with the story for several reasons:
 
1. I understand that they only have a few minutes to cover this story, but  
the story was one-sided for the most part. What was the "erroneous" 
information?  Was it a date? A whole paragraph? Some vandalism? Also, did the professor 
even  bother fixing it? Otherwise, he has no right to complain about an 
encyclopedia  that anyone can edit.
 
2. The reporter demonstrated how vandalism works without even mentioning  the 
thousands of people who spend hours and hours each day reverting nonsense  
and issuing blocks. I always thought the press was supposed to be somewhat  
balanced.
 
3. I am glad they mentioned the fact that people should not be using this  in 
a paper in most situations. They got that right, but they singled out  
Wikipedia without mentioning that encyclopedias AS A WHOLE are not good sources  for 
papers.



************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. 
 Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.