I was about to say "What's the joke?"


Then I saw it.

el oh el



to bad it got changed back


but i swear to god thats their motto

lol i just saw it, gg

lmfao!! haha nice one

yeah lmao same i had to read everything =[


*EDIT*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France new motta? pssh nigga plz.

wikipedia is the worst place to get information its all opinion with very lil fact.

what you put as there motto was true but as you can see they dont want the truth on wiki

I'm sure you won't mind backing that up, right? Like anything, think for yourself, if it doesn't look right or ring true keep researching, never single source anything. Remember that there are political forces in the world that will try to suppress information or will outright lie. On the whole wikipedia is fairly reliable for the big picture, but you should verify details.


Yeah that's whay it was reverted 00:33Zulu. If people wouldn't do shit like this, it could be better, but fixing this stuff takes time to maintain.

Uber, please don't turn every post into a F*CKING fight...

wikipedia is not written by experts, it is not a refereed source, therefor your are no supposed to cite it in any research paper

took me long enough to find it...lol

Spork, this isn't a fight, but like I said, wikipedia is ok for big picture stuff. The people who maintain it care about it and try to do their best to make it factual. Others post BS there for their own purposes, so tek has a point, I simply wanted to point out his view on it is a tad overstated.

LC, You're correct in that it's not peer reviewed and generally not acceptable as a sole source for information. I think I said that you should verify detail. Not having written many research papers, I don't know what those rules would be for citations.

wiki is not even good to reference. sorry

I use it for background knowledge BEFORE I start doing a research paper. It's good to get a sense of the events, who is involved, etc.

It's also handy if you forget when _______ was born, or wrote their masterpiece, or whatever...you can find it quite easily on wikipedia.

To answer your question. Research papers don't accept it as a reference at all. Or at least generally. I have never found a person that accepted it in a paper.

no collage that i have herd of, (or even high school now) accepts wikipedia as a valid source.



like its been said its good for a scim to get a quick picture very fast, and you can even use some of the things they site there, but you cant site wikipedia itself

You mean, your artwork forcefully rejects pictures printed from wikipedia?

It's technically impossible to accurately cite something like Wikipedia. You can use the references at the bottom of articles, but since Wikipedia itself is freely editted, there's a big chance that what you cited won't be what shows up if someone visits in a week or two.

That's funny stuff.

♥