Any 6-year-old can contribute to Wikipedia. All anyone has to do is write a page. Of course they reserve the right to "edit" anything they wish. I don't consult Wiki ... it's usually trash.
Such is how the left operates. Control information.
They can't win in a fair fight in the arena of ideas.
That's what I thought too. It's readers contribute. What better way for libbies to get and spread more false info.
Actually, the Wikipedia is usually very accurate. There are problems, and articles sometimes are biased, but the system generally works far better than your description would lead someone to believe. One reason is because bias is a multi-edged sword on a wiki: all sides get to play. Another reason is because a wiki produces good results in the same way a society does: by collaboration from all parties, each seeking its own self interest.
Disclaimer: I happen to personally know Ward Cunningham, the inventor of wiki, due to my long usage of the Smalltalk programming langauge (since 1985.) I also know or have met Dan Ingalls, Adele Goldberg, Dave Robson, Ted Kaehler, Diana Merry-Shapiro and Alan Kay (members of the Xerox PARC Smalltalk design team.)
"Any 6-year-old can contribute to Wikipedia. All anyone has to do is write a page. Of course they reserve the right to "edit" anything they wish. I don't consult Wiki ... it's usually trash."
I use it for general definitions, though I was unaware of the "news" side. The definitions I get seem pretty good, as far as I can see.
Actually, for most general research, it's fairly accurate. I use it quite a bit in my classes, and the pages usually have external links for further study.