[njbchbum]

Originally Posted by blueash

Wikipedia is extremely accurate with facts. While errors can be introduced either intentionally or erroneously they will be corrected. For fun google Wikipedia versus Britannica and you will find that for science topics, names, dates etc the accuracy is equal. It is excellent for history, medicine, science, biography.... Like any reference one should never depend on a single source but for people to simply repeat the Wikipedia is unreliable meme suggests they have not done their research.

To its credit there is even a Wikipedia page on the reliability of Wikipedia.

Reliability of Wikipedia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

blueash - Have to seriously disagree!

There is no sure way to know if info is erroneous or corrected and not time line for insuring when erroneous info will be realized and corrected. And the arbitration process for correction has more holes than ages swiss cheese.

W vs B is great as you post for science - and for nature - articles...not necessarily so for material re the Villages and government issues.

Really? - give full credence to a defense prepared by the violator [re your wiki reliability website]?

To say that anything wiki is to be fully trusted and considered reliable indicates that folks HAVE NOT done their research.