When I first tried to edit Wikipedia it was a real punch to the gut to learn you cannot reference primary sources.
Have a link to a study? Not allowed. Link to a government document or report? Not allowed. Link to a local paper? Not allowed.
The only sources you're allowed to reference are the major newspapers, which are entirely broken and corrupt. If all the sources are corrupt, what does it say about all the info on Wikipedia?
I took a journalism course in college around 2012. It was sad the amount of people trying to use Wikipedia in college to use as a source when we had published books in our library on campus. I don’t even go to Wikipedia for any sourcing, and google uses it as their top reference.
"Wikipedia articles should be based mainly on reliable secondary sources, i.e., a document or recording that relates or discusses information originally presented elsewhere."
You can guess the kind of publication they have in mind when they wrote this...
As an exercise, why aren't the Q posts available on Wikipedia? Why is the Q info on Wikipedia so subpar?
When I first tried to edit Wikipedia it was a real punch to the gut to learn you cannot reference primary sources.
Have a link to a study? Not allowed. Link to a government document or report? Not allowed. Link to a local paper? Not allowed.
The only sources you're allowed to reference are the major newspapers, which are entirely broken and corrupt. If all the sources are corrupt, what does it say about all the info on Wikipedia?
Big red pill moment for me.
Try https://wikispooks.com
I took a journalism course in college around 2012. It was sad the amount of people trying to use Wikipedia in college to use as a source when we had published books in our library on campus. I don’t even go to Wikipedia for any sourcing, and google uses it as their top reference.
I hate Wikipedia.
Are you serious?
I've never been big into wiki except as a starting point to find sources for research, or in encyclopedic topics not relating to politics.
What kind of retardation would preclude primary sources?
You have to be a lawyer to get through it but this IIRC is the party that will get you blocked.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources
"Wikipedia articles should be based mainly on reliable secondary sources, i.e., a document or recording that relates or discusses information originally presented elsewhere."
You can guess the kind of publication they have in mind when they wrote this...
As an exercise, why aren't the Q posts available on Wikipedia? Why is the Q info on Wikipedia so subpar?
Any compelling example you'd like to present?
Are you serious??? How TF did I not know this???
Cheese + crackers…. Can we nuke Silicon Valley yet???