Wikipedia as a source?

[Revoltingest]

Just offhand, without checking?


About two weeks ago I was reading a Wiki article about climate change deniers. where the author was accusing one man of being an absolute denier. The quote referenced, however, was this man saying that the earth changes climate constantly; that humans are NOT completely responsible for it, but that we can and do make things worse. He went on to illustrate the power of humans to screw things up (and to fix them) by referring to the hole in the ozone layer (remember that? It's still up there) that was caused by human activity...and then when the cause was discovered, banning fluorocarbons globally not only stopped the growth of the hole, it's shrinking and will be gone by the end of the century.

Not exactly the stance of a 'climate change denier.'

.....and it would be, I think, important to any conversation about climate change, I think, casual or not.

So...I check the references.

Mostly.

And yet, that sounds like an insignificant error, ie, the mislabeling of an individual.
Now, if the discussion were about that individual, you'd have made a case.
But regarding climate change, GW, or AGW, it's a de minimis mistake.

Btw. in highly charged issues where someone is labeled as this or that,
I'd expect a higher probability of mischief. In such cases, if it mattered,
I check the internet for diversity of opinion. This is often because linked
citations are too often restricted somehow.

 

[dianaiad]

And yet, that sounds like an insignificant error, ie, the mislabeling of an individual.
Now, if the discussion were about that individual, you'd have made a case.
But regarding climate change, GW, or AGW, it's a de minimis mistake.

Btw. in highly charged issues where someone is labeled as this or that,
I'd expect a higher probability of mischief. In such cases, if it mattered,
I check the internet for diversity of opinion. This is often because linked
citations are too often restricted somehow.

Insignificant or not...it was an error. AND it was an error that was either deliberate or...insufficiently researched. Either way, it's a problem that damages the credibility of the Wiki author.

.....and how do we know, if insignificant errors are allowed, that more important ones are not?

So, it's a good idea to check. Just call those of us who check the 'peers" who do the reviewing.

 

[Revoltingest]

Insignificant or not...it was an error. AND it was an error that was either deliberate or...insufficiently researched. Either way, it's a problem that damages the credibility of the Wiki author.

.....and how do we know, if insignificant errors are allowed, that more important ones are not?

So, it's a good idea to check. Just call those of us who check the 'peers" who do the reviewing.

You're welcome to use only original sources for citations.
I'll stick to Wikipedia. If ever it significantly adversely
affects my post, feel free to make a well sourced correction.

 

[dianaiad]

You're welcome to use only original sources for citations.
I'll stick to Wikipedia. If ever it significantly adversely
affects my post, feel free to make a well sourced correction.

(sigh)

In other words, I get to do your homework?

Ah, well. Of course, I'll probably only do that if I"m arguing with you, and disagreeing with you on some point, where finding a screw-up with your Wikipedia cite will work to my advantage.

If I AGREE with you, I probably won't.....

 

[Revoltingest]

In other words, I get to do your homework?

And in fairness, I'll do your reasoning for you.
I'm generous that way.

Ah, well. Of course, I'll probably only do that if I"m arguing with you, and disagreeing with you on some point, where finding a screw-up with your Wikipedia cite will work to my advantage.

If I AGREE with you, I probably won't.....

And when you can't wade thru scholarly works in a timely fashion,
I'll keep the discussion going with my more efficient sources.

 

[dianaiad]

And in fairness, I'll do your reasoning for you.
I'm generous that way.

Thank you for the offer. However, having to plow through my reasoning process so that you can figure out what it is I'm doing will give you a terminal migraine, so out of concern for your health, I'll do my own reasoning.

Thanks again, though.

And when you can't wade thru scholarly works in a timely fashion,
I'll keep the discussion going with my more efficient sources.

no worries. Speed reader, here.....