• brucethemoose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    Yes, I remember too. We were specifically told not to use Wikipedia.

    Then information hygiene went to shit. Now it’s a rare oasis in the current landscape.

    Look, I’m not saying to start referencing Wikipedia in scholarly journals or papers. But it’s more accessible than some JSTOR database and way above average, and more of the population using it would be a wonderful thing. The vast majority of the time, Wikipedia is not the source of misinformation/disinformation in this world.

    • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Then information hygiene went to shit. Now it’s a rare oasis in the current landscape.

      It went to shit because people started treating low quality sources like Wikipedia as “a rare oasis”.

      The vast majority of the time, Wikipedia is not the source of misinformation/disinformation in this world.

      Are you sure about that?

      • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        …You’re kidding, right?

        I’m looking around the information landscape around me, and Wikipedia is not even in the top 1000 of disinformation peddlers. They make mistakes, but they aren’t literally lying and propagandizing millions of people on purpose.

        • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          and Wikipedia is not even in the top 1000 of disinformation peddlers.

          And you determined this how?

          They make mistakes, but they aren’t literally lying and propagandizing millions of people on purpose.

          And you determined this how?