it is. but i hate it because it puts paid professional encyclopedia writers out of work. freeloaders love it though. and people give away information for free on it. information that used to be paid for!
This is why I said what I said about wiki. Carry on... Is Wikipedia a Reliable Source? « The Way Things Work: Organizations There is an edit button where anyone can change info Is Wikipedia a Reliable Source? « The Way Things Work: Organizations
Of course contains some has inaccuracies, but they get cleaned up in the same way that they get added. There are a million editors looking for errors. One would be a fool to take wiki or anything else as gospel. But it is a good launching point for finding useful data. They do have procedures to constantly improve the listings and eliminate errors, which is more than most online resources offer.
Who would win in a steel caged original UFC fight (tap out or knock out): George W. or Obama? I would put big money on W. W's in great shape and Obama's a longtime smoke.
you know as much as you and I disagree on just about everything, you crack me up way too often to ever stop reading what you post.
you should be more concerned over who is smarter GWB or Obama not who can win in a fight. I think we all know the answer to that. And who did the best for our country. GWB still smokes cigars! Ignore the facts all you want it doesn't change them. I guess to frog cigars aren't a tobacco product.:insane:
so what. you've been so consumed with trying to zing Red about fixing prices, etc. in the "Gas Prices" thread that it appears you've forgotten to take your own advice. so what is it? do you want to fix the price of information now? should we all be subject to paying for information because you say so? how dare you martin! i am highly offended that you want to eliminate wikipedia just to keep a few encyclopedia writers employed. sound familiar?
