Mandatory Paternity Testing (dinner, public, how to, women)

[Ivorytickler]

Originally Posted by Antlered Chamataka

Wiki is dangerous. More than half the information is wrong and is biased. I'm saying this coz I used to be a contributer to Byzantine and Roman history, and then some Turkish fool would show up (thinking I'm American, and I'm not, LOL, it's their inborn counter-crusader paranoia) and change it coz it insults his heritage. It goes into a train of edit wars. It grows old. Wiki truly is information hijacking, wait until someone who doesn't like it shows up and writes his own version of facts.

I'd rather pick a book up

Sadly, MOST of my students couldn't believe that I expected them to use a BOOK as a resource on their mid term projects. You wouldn't believe the excuses I got when I told them to visit a library.

I've seen WIKI entries change several times a day. I swear there are people who go on there and put in the most rediculous things they can just for the thrill of people beleiving it. Sadly, my students believe anything that they get off of the internet. Welcome to the information overload generation. In this day and age, you need to be able to tell good information from bad and you do that by double checking with reputable sources.

[Braunwyn]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

Actually, NO. Wiki can be edited by any Tom, Dick or Harry who wants to edit it. I teach chemistry and I've had students come to me with WIKI printouts thare are dead wrong. I've gone in and corrected a few myself only to have someone change it back. It's so bad, the school I teach at refuses to allow WIKI as a source. What it is good for is finding food for thought but I'd back anything up with data from another site I found there.

Well, wiki isn't going to be used as cite for school, of course, but I've found it to be generally on point. OTOH, if citations are not included, any information is disregarded. So, it's not the simple typed words that typically matter, but the citations.

Just a for example, I had a student argue with me that dissolving one "MOLECULE" of salt in water would drop the freezing point by several degrees and she had a WIKI print out to prove it. The print out wasn't even right if it had been 6.02 times 10 to the 23 formula units of salt let alone the single "molecule" (molecule in quotes because salt is ionic and doesn't come in molecules).

As stated, comparable with typical encyclopedias...

"Wikipedia is about as good a source of accurate information as Britannica, the venerable standard-bearer of facts about the world around us, according to a study published this week in the journal Nature. "
Study: Wikipedia as accurate as Britannica - CNET News

So, actually it seems to be Yes.

With that said, I have recently found a load of errors in paper published in a scientific journal. Errors tend to find their way here and there, which is why cross-referencing is important.

[Currency Pair Crocodile]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

Sadly, MOST of my students couldn't believe that I expected them to use a BOOK as a resource on their mid term projects. You wouldn't believe the excuses I got when I told them to visit a library.

Wiki and google have become the two main information misinformation agents of the internet. Their intention was great, but the media spinners showed up and what they can't do to a published book, they can to a webpage, so easily.

One can't mess with a published book. You even need to go thru the pain of publishing a counter-argment book and it's hard. It's not hard anymore

I'm so glad I finished school and got my higher education before wiki and google exploded. These days I get told engineering students even copy and steal projects from online. That "is" unfortunate, we are generating a generation of retards for posterity

[Currency Pair Crocodile]

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

Well, wiki isn't going to be used as cite for school, of course, but I've found it to be generally on point. OTOH, if citations are not included, any information is disregarded. So, it's not the simple typed words that typically matter, but the citations.


As stated, comparable with typical encyclopedias...

"Wikipedia is about as good a source of accurate information as Britannica, the venerable standard-bearer of facts about the world around us, according to a study published this week in the journal Nature. "
Study: Wikipedia as accurate as Britannica - CNET News

So, actually it seems to be Yes.

With that said, I have recently found a load of errors in paper published in a scientific journal. Errors tend to find their way here and there, which is why cross-referencing is important.

Braun, that's just one news reporter's opinion column.

Truth be told, in many universities, particularly research and engineering, wiki is no longer accepted as a source for thesis and research

It's only a good starting point, if you quickly want to find out the scientific name of a certain plant or the general population demographic of a country.

[Ivorytickler]

Originally Posted by Antlered Chamataka

Wiki and google have become the two main information misinformation agents of the internet. Their intention was great, but the media spinners showed up and what they can't do to a published book, they can to a webpage, so easily.

One can't mess with a published book. You even need to go thru the pain of publishing a counter-argment book and it's hard. It's not hard anymore

I'm so glad I finished school and got my higher education before wiki and google exploded. These days I get told engineering students even copy and steal projects from online. That "is" unfortunate, we are generating a generation of retards for posterity

Did I mention ?

The sad part is the students I teach think they're so smart because they can find something on line. I had four mid term projects, blatently, plagerized from the internet. Sadly, for every one I catch, there are 5 I didn't. Some students are actually smart enough to change things up enough that I can't find them in a Google search . I wish my school would invest in anti plagerism software.

Sadly, cheating has become normal.

[Ivorytickler]

Well, we've gone, completely off topic. Must be time to wrap up this thread. I believe we've already had the obligatory reference to Nazi's.

[Braunwyn]

Originally Posted by Antlered Chamataka

Braun, that's just one news reporter's opinion column.

The study is coming from Nature, not a reporters column. The problem is that it's unlikely most reading this thread will be able to access Nature. And again, I need to restart my computer to access anything because my certificate isn't being recognized when I try to log on to my job's intranet. This computer takes forever to boot up.

Truth be told, in many universities, particularly research and engineering, wiki is no longer accepted as a source for thesis and research

It's only a good starting point, if you quickly want to find out the scientific name of a certain plant or the general population demographic of a country.

That's exactly my point. I haven't suggested using wiki as a citation. But, I often use it as a starting point and follow the citations, which are sometimes good and sometimes not. I can tell you that I'm not the only one that goes to wiki at my job for some of the basics.

[Braunwyn]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

Well, we've gone, completely off topic. Must be time to wrap up this thread. I believe we've already had the obligatory reference to Nazi's.

C'mon, tho, you don't think Nature's study of comparisons is interesting? I was quite surprised when I first came across it.

[Ivorytickler]

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

The study is coming from Nature, not a reporters column. The problem is that it's unlikely most reading this thread will be able to access Nature. And again, I need to restart my computer to access anything because my certificate isn't being recognized when I try to log on to my job's intranet. This computer takes forever to boot up.


That's exactly my point. I haven't suggested using wiki as a citation. But, I often use it as a starting point and follow the citations, which are sometimes good and sometimes not. I can tell you that I'm not the only one that goes to wiki at my job for some of the basics.

The only thing I use it for are things I already know but have forgotten. I recognize the right number or compound name when I see it so I know it's right. I just have so much stuff in my head, some falls out sometimes...

[Currency Pair Crocodile]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

Did I mention ?

The sad part is the students I teach think they're so smart because they can find something on line. I had four mid term projects, blatently, plagerized from the internet. Sadly, for every one I catch, there are 5 I didn't. Some students are actually smart enough to change things up enough that I can't find them in a Google search . I wish my school would invest in anti plagerism software.

Sadly, cheating has become normal.

My old engineering college just invested millions to install that software. It maintains a database of all known engineering projects in several domains, somewhere the research theses get posted to a common server, it's more of a joint program across several universities in several countries to fight this project stealing thing. Coz finally it only damages the school reputation, if the copying student gets credit and gets accepted into McKinsey or SAP, and he is found to suck. It usually beats back on the institution

They installed it in 2005 and it's still not that perfect, but it weeds out 60% of the cheats and that itself is enough to scare the students into doing authentic work.

It's sad, I feel sorry for the students of this generation. That's why they come to work and they feel clueless. Lot of guys get caught trying to google to perform critical work, they get the pink slips way too often.