http://www.bounte.com/2010/01/the-nature-of-history-at-wikipedia/ new electronica Wed, 12 Jan 2011 17:56:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://www.bounte.com/2010/01/the-nature-of-history-at-wikipedia/comment-page-1/#comment-32 Ari Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:47:55 +0000 http://www.bounte.com/?p=523#comment-32 By the way....it's time to beef up the Bounte wiki entry!!!! By the way….it’s time to beef up the Bounte wiki entry!!!!

]]> http://www.bounte.com/2010/01/the-nature-of-history-at-wikipedia/comment-page-1/#comment-31 Ari Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:45:35 +0000 http://www.bounte.com/?p=523#comment-31 Thoughtful observations. I'd like to think that Wikipedia is a reliable resource. I've always been amazed at how a database that vast could be devoid of substantial factual errors. Obviously, there will be some, but having never edited it myself, I can't imagine how it can be factually regulated and stay reliable. It's amazing on the one hand, and now that I think about how much I reference it for random info, frightening. I guess it's a perfect example of the importance of crosschecking any info with multiple sources. Thoughtful observations. I’d like to think that Wikipedia is a reliable resource. I’ve always been amazed at how a database that vast could be devoid of substantial factual errors. Obviously, there will be some, but having never edited it myself, I can’t imagine how it can be factually regulated and stay reliable. It’s amazing on the one hand, and now that I think about how much I reference it for random info, frightening. I guess it’s a perfect example of the importance of crosschecking any info with multiple sources.

]]>