I'm certain all here know the ins and outs of Wiki. I use Wiki and with Caution. I can Trust Wiki on many issues and many with Caution. https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...rid=1900406372
I will use it for purely technical information; it is usually good for that. Anything that even smells of politics or culture, I avoid Wikipedia completely. Brittanica on line has a much more even treatment of more popular topics. There is also this ( https://infogalactic.com/info/Infogalactic:Introduction ) which I have found to be much more neutral than Wikipedia. From the link… “Infogalactic does not share the highly centralized structure of Wikipedia or the ideological dogma of the Wikimedia Foundation. The primary requirements are for the information contributed to be true, relevant, and verifiable, rather than cited from a so-called “published reliable source”, since experience has proven how reliance upon the latter can be easily gamed by editors and administrators alike. There is no culture of notability, ideology, or deletionism at Infogalactic.”
I use it mostly to look up people living and dead and some stats on the people. Also cities and states data.
Other than fixing a typo or changing a bad link for a good one, I don't do much there anymore, but I have been an editor with Wikipedia for years, While creating categories for small towns and localities for the web directory, I would come across several that weren't yet in Wikipedia, so I created the original copy for several of them. At first, things weren't noticeably political. As editors, we were supposed to either stay away from the politics or, when that wasn't possible, create sections for both sides of the issue. That all changed more than a decade ago. While I wasn't paying close attention, I think it began with a few issues where there were editors who had strong opinions on the Left. Where there was controversy, there would be a Talk area where editors could battle it out behind the scenes, but other editors would battle it out on the public end, changing content to match their view, while others would change it back, and so on., In order to stop the back and forth on the public pages, Wikipedia enacted a policy where controversial topics would be locked, so that only those in the upper echelon of Wikipedia could edit those pages. Then, of course, those on the Left worked their way into the upper echelon, while many of those on the Right, like me, just gave it up, since we couldn't even touch the political stuff.
Same here...mostly those two same things. Since I don't have cable, I watch a lot of the legacy TV shows from the 50s and 60s. Since my laptop is always on, I look up the actors & actresses that we all grew up watching. WIKI seems to have the most info on them.
^^^ speaking of the above… https://slaynews.com/news/wikipedia-co-founder-site-hijacked-us-government-info-warfare/
Generally, if it is a non-controversial issue, Wikipedia can be pretty accurate. Especially if it is more obscure and not something widely read. My wife and I are binge watching the old, original Perry Mason show. And we go to Wikipedia to read the biographies of some of the actors that appear on the show. Some of these actors were only in the business for 5 years, not well known. Maybe someone reads that wikipedia article once every few years. By the way, the show is really just great. Plus you see famous actors just getting their start in the business. We saw Robert Redford, James Coburn, a bunch of actors who later appeared in Star Trek, has been fun, Louise Fletcher and more... We get it through Amazon Prime, for free. 9 Seasons! Lot of free TV! Amazon Prime has worked out well for us. It's like $15 a month. We got it for free when we got a big screen TV. Then we renewed after that. With Amazon Prime you get free deliveries. So, we easily order enough Amazon that we would pay more than $15 a month in shipping costs. So, it is basically free for us.
True enough. I go to Wikipedia a lot, and if they left their left-wing politics out of it, Wikipedia would be an outstanding resource.
I get antenna TV and watch Perry Mason on one of the Legacy TV Show channels. Did you know that the actor who played private eye Paul Drake (William Hopper) was gossip columnist Hedda Hopper's son?