(April 12, 2009 at 5:25 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: You're comparing Wikipedia to peer-reviewed scientific journals? You serious?Obviously Wikipedia isn't a scientific journal, and obviously it's not going to replace scientific journals.
Why is it that a Wikipedia article, a community reviewed document with extensive references(often including respected scientific journals) can simply be called unreliable as a matter of opinion?
Tens of thousands of articles on Wikipedia are just as good as you can find anywhere, online or off. Do you disagree?
I just think people are misinformed about the whole structure and workings of Wikipedia, and jump to conclusions.
- Meatball
