Re: The wonderful world of students, part 482834

On Jun 4, 10:26 am, miander...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Jun 4, 3:46 am, Trent Woodruff <woodru...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 15:57:34 -0700, miander...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
My side still hurts from laughing. I really wish I knew who it was who
had sent this to me.
I use wikipedia all the time with medicine stuff, especially pharm.

Sure, but you're an idiot. That speaks for itself.

but my point is that the material on wikipedia on many subjects is
sufficient to answer most boardtype questions with. For example if I
know most of the wikipedia entry for digoxin(a popular heart failure
drug), I'm going to be able to answer most any question about digoxin
that I would need to. Or heck that even a resident would need to know
how to apply.


That's just fine, but how does this jibe with your "Academic types who
bash wikipedia are lame" statement?

Wikipedia is fine for broad, general knowledge about something, but it
is inappropriate to be sourced in a paper or project because it isn't
authoritative. That is all mihos and kardex were saying.

Jon

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The wonderful world of students, part 482834
    ... I use wikipedia all the time with medicine stuff, ... sufficient to answer most boardtype questions with. ... Wikipedia is fine for broad, general knowledge about something, but it ... agree that in a formal research paper *citing* wikipedia would be ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
  • Re: The wonderful world of students, part 482834
    ... I use wikipedia all the time with medicine stuff, ... Sure, but you're an idiot. ... That speaks for itself. ... sufficient to answer most boardtype questions with. ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
Quantcast