[WikiEN-l] Abuse of your services

Mon May 9 06:05:26 UTC 2005

On 5/9/05, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> 
> I have never used Usenet as a source of information, and, given the
> controversy that it engenders, I would only do so with extreme caution.
> I would make no absolute rule against using it, but a critical reader
> needs to be aware that its use as a reference will taint the credibility
> of the material.  The value of an article depends on the combined
> credibility of its sources and integrity of its contributors.

UseNet is a great source of facts for UseNet-related information.
Other editors have described using it to test the period of use of
words, phrases, abbreviations and memes. It is a good source for
certain types of information so long as used wisely and selectively.

But using it as a checkable source for general knowledge - the sort of
material one would generally expect to find in an encyclopaedia -
well, I think you've hit the nail on the head with your remarks above.

Having said that, I note that Wikipedia is not as authoritative a
source as we would like. Editors all too often post material that
belongs in the realm of "community myth" rather than "checkable fact".
Just like UseNet.

-- 
Peter in Canberra