• Honytawk@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    86
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    The thing is that it is very easy to read Wikipedia critically, since it lists every single source they get info from at the bottom of the page.

    • Zacryon@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      And here I am fixing missing sources on some wiki articles just yesterday.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      I feel like news sources used to link to their sources too, but now it seems to be an infinite chain of links to their own articles, never directly taking you to the first hand source of information (unless they are the source).

    • TheActualDevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      The thing is, if the place you’re getting your information from doesn’t list it’s sources, you can’t trust it. Whenever I’m researching a thing on the internet and I find an article or a paper, I don’t just stop there, I check where they got their info, then I find that source and read it. I follow it all the way back until I find the primary source.

      Like the other day I was writing a paper about a particular court case. In the opinions, as in most cases, they use precedent and cite prior cases. So I found the other cases that referred to the thing I was writing about, and it turns out they were also just using prior cases. I had to go 6 deep before I found them referencing the actual constitution for one of them. On another I found it interesting that the most recent use case was so far removed from what the original one was about and it was could probably be questionable to even use it as precedent if they had used the original instead of another case.

      Anyway, the point is, always check sources. If anyone says anything on the internet, assume it’s just their opinion until you check and follow the sources…

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Are you familiar with Harlow V Fitzgerald, and the full text of article 1983 including the 16 words that went missing in n 1874 when it was “copied” from the Congressional Record into the Federal Register? I’m not a lawyer, but I do want that decision reviewed, since as the law was written and passed by Congress, Harlow V Fitzgerald should have gone the other way.

      • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s why you don’t use Wikipedia as your primary source, you follow the citations. Of course, if you can’t verify that it’s accurate information, don’t report it, but it can be used as a jump off to find a legitimate source if the information you cant immediately verify is useful.