Wikipedia - A general discussion of its validity

From an administrator's perspective, I don't understand the objection to Wikipedia. Granted, it is not guaranteed to be 100% correct. But what is? Even peer reviewed scientific journals contain errors.If we disallow wiki, don't we have to also disallow all newpaper and on-line media reports? Wouldn't we have to disallow the pdf file for the Dover ID decision, since that was hosted on a media site rather than the court's own site?If somebody makes a reference to wiki, that can still be challenged by better evidence. If someone makes a reference to a peer reviewed article, that can also be challenged by reference to newer better results.If we are going to have a debate with broad participation, then I think we should not be too restrictive in what is allowed as reference material. In most cases, it is up to the debaters to challenge particular references.

---

Perhaps I misundertood the meaning of in Message 96.

That's good to hear. In the particular case, you could have simply challenged the relevance of that particular wiki entry by pointing out that it makes a bare assertion with no details whatsoever on travel to Iraq.

---