this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
98 points (92.2% liked)
Asklemmy
43968 readers
1259 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Wikipedia is basically useless without the sources, though. It's just a TL;DR summary of things.
Wikipedia is absolutely not useless without the sources. I donβt even know what to say, that statement is so deranged.
WP as it is is of course not useless. But don't confuse it with a real library. Then, imagine in the apocalyptical worst case, having archived only that summary of humankind's knowledge. There's a vast amount of detail that WP is just not the right place for.
Well, sure, of course it leaves a lot of material out. But you'd start with Wikipedia surely, then move onto the source material. If Wikipedia leaves out a lot of material, any one of its sources leaves out a lot more.
Then you download the source material too, shouldn't be more than a few Yottabytes π€·