The Security of Using the Internet as Reference

[Simetrical]

I remember a few people complaining about certain things that were included in Wikipedia, and supporting their own claims with reference to an isolated incident. I know sometimes it's hard to come up with general information on certain topics, and that reliable compilations of these things are rare, but we should be mindful that isolated incidents might not be representative.

I think I can speak for about 84% of the Internet, that this kind of thing will not validate your claims against Wikipedia. Why start this thread now? Well, I was reading some news, and this came up...link

Watch out for this type of thing, it's not that uncommon, individual data points are not always representative.

[Fenrhyl]

Well, it is ok as long as you give credit to Nature. I don't.

I am usually highly suspicious about free material on the internet. I founs several well written and illustrated free soruces about European history that were in fact cover-ups for fascist or racist groups.

The only online ressources i use come from universities and i usually confront 3 or more sources before starting to use that kind of material... some specialists can be very opiniated.

Lately i found several closed ressources in free acces like the Littré dictionnary for french language (if you are looking for a word which has not be pronounced since four centuries, you'll find it there) or open ressources in universities FTP and i was really pleased. It took me a bit more time to find, but time is allways a good investment.

[Sarcasm]

I remember a few people complaining about certain things that were included in Wikipedia, and supporting their own claims with reference to an isolated incident. I know sometimes it's hard to come up with general information on certain topics, and that reliable compilations of these things are rare, but we should be mindful that isolated incidents might not be representative.

I think I can speak for about 84% of the Internet, that this kind of thing will not validate your claims against Wikipedia. Why start this thread now? Well, I was reading some news, and this came up...link

Watch out for this type of thing, it's not that uncommon, individual data points are not always representative.

[Simetrical]

Well, it is ok as long as you give credit to Nature. I don't.

You have high standards if you don't trust such a reputable science journal.

That's . . . vulgar.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
Me vulgar too...


.

[Sarcasm]

More like vulgar humour..

[Dux Corvanus]

What's vulgar about a green smiley readying to throw a pair of dices?

[Simetrical]

Nothing. Is that relevant?

[GoreBag]

What's vulgar about a green smiley readying to throw a pair of dices?

That. It's just 'dice'.