its shit this is beneath the surface pure shit world's place for pedophiles!fuk dont CREATE FUCKIN WIKIPEDIA SHIT DONT SPONSOR IT, BEST STUFF AND ALL ITS LINKS BOOKMARK 100% TRUTH WIKIPEDIA-WATCH ORG!RULES!
supreme nothin GIVE TO ALL, PRINT ALL LINKS WIKIPEDIA-WATCH ORG WE SENT TO ALL UNIVERSITIES IN NORTH AMERICA!LOL!SUK ON THIS REAL HARD WIKIPEDOS LOLWY DIRTY LOWLIFES FOREVER AMEN!WE HELPED FUK UP EDPEDOS, NOW WE'LL FUK UP WIKIPEDOS SPONSORS LOL! NOTHING CAN STOP US! WE HAVE OVER 1000000 ACCOUNTS ON WIKIPEDIA, SORRY WIKIPEDOIA, PLACE FOR WORLDWIDE PERVS! DIGNUM LAUDE VIRUM, MUSA VETA BWEAR MORI, BRAVO, BRAVISIMO!!! WE 100% RULE, U 100% DRULE!!!
if truth were indeed relative in the sense that there is no absolute truth and what is true and false is relative to the circumstance or to the generation or to the culture or to the observer or self or any other subject, then there is absolutely no point in you making any arguments, stating any facts, making this video, going to school, reading a non-fiction book, or watching the news (though the latter may be a waste of everyone's time anyway), because the truth is not necessarily there
everyone is full of shit....... what ever the majority says at the moment is the truth even when there dead wrong people said and thought things such as the world is flat or people are witches with black magic powers so they most be burned alive lol individual people can be intelligent but humans as a whole are fuckin dumb as it gets
In the 1960's declaring cigarettes were healthy was not the truth or a misconception, it was a LIE. They always knew smoking was bad, for a long time. They LIE to make money.
Wikipedia restrictions are confusing. I can't upload any image, unless it's public domain, or has sharealikeattributeorsomeothercommonscrap which restricts you to now being able to get a certain image from just any place.
Wikipedia sucks. They intentionally censored out the fact that NH AG cum U.S. Senator Kelly Ayotte believes she can threaten to arrest which reporters she does not like at publicly-advertised political rallies held on commercial property
Watch this video at KingCast65:
Jimmy Wales and Wikipedia = bought & sold hypocrites who cannot be trusted
Their last excuse? I can't prove Kelly knows about it. Too bad I served her at her house. She & McCain love throwing out black reporters Stephen Price.
@ShiningDesertEagle That may be the strict definition of truth or the ideal of truth. But I think what he meant is that what people commonly refer to as the "truth" is often relative. For example many people claim the Bible is "true"/based on "facts" where as many people would argue otherwise.
40 seconds into the video and I got why Wikipedia didn't give him credit .... simply putting ... you could kill this man simply by pulling the plug on his computer. he would die from the absence of I.T. XD...
are you kiding ? britannica is the biggest loser in the encyclopdia battle. it's like way too incomplete to be clasified as one. wikipedia shits all over britannica. and it;s only gonna get better.
@Dept3k hey moron, you can take your book and burn them. we have the internet now, and it's here to stay. long after we burn all the trees. bbritannica is a complete piece of shit compared to wikipedia. wikipedia shits all over any othe encyclopedia. PERIOD. just give me 1 word that has more info in britannica than in wikipedia. i dare you.
Really? When did I say Britannica is good? I dont even know about it you hoe. And besides, very pointless replying to a 2 months old comment. DIPSHIT. Go die son. Seriously, wikipedia is full of crap.
@Dept3k you are full of crap. you suck. you don't even have the right to complain about it, its not being made with your money, so just get over it, if you don't like it , don't read it, stay out of it. simple. who gives a shit about your pointles troll-like opinion. your born ot be a stupid little pupet that's never satisfied, always complaining, just becaues it's cool. lol. what an insect.
And - Wikipedia isnt made of money in ANY kind of way? Except for hosting the website you damn fucker. there are 10 year olds writing articles. Now stfu. Get back to school fucking idiot. Hasn't your teacher told u u shudnt use wikipedia? DUMBASS
@Dept3k first off , retard, i didn't ask if wikipedia is made with money, of course bandwidth costs, it's made with donations. I ASKED if you contribue any money. since you DON"T move along worm. second, i'll let you in on a little secret. 10 y.o. kids have better stuff to do, it actually takes a bit of dedication to write a whole article or start one. And i'm willing ot bet that there are tons of PhD qualified or otherwise inteligent people that write, even if they do it anonimously.
OMG! SO sorry! I'm just too scared!Ok.... There was a lady who was walking in the forest with her dog and was killed. If u r reading this, then u will find a dead bloody body hanging in ur closet. U will be haunted and killed by her. to stop it posti this to 6 other videos in 30 GOOD LUCK
Well no matter how much you bag on the people who never go to a library or research properly, you have to admit Wikipedia is still quite usefull no matter how bad or inacurate it really is...
Although I was making a general statement, it's amazing what bullshit people believe. Or don't believe. Teenagers (and pre-teens) and post-teens: if what you're looking for isn't in google searches, it simply doesn't exist. College students are searching like they did as 4th graders: google. Point, click, duhhhhhhhhh. It's sad.
oh i just love how people like u make stereotype statements newflash dude NOT EVERY TEEN OR PRE-TEEN DOES THAT i should know because i am one that actually works hard and doesnt just point and click and copy and paste and im done no i actually work hard so dude shut the fuck up and stop being a fuckin stereotype or else it will catch up to u in the long run dipshit
I think what he meant is that our understanding of "truth" or popular "consensus" of truth or the official "truth" endorsed by the establishment and powers that be is relative. Like the "truths" of science for instance. If you read about the "truths" accepted and believed by mainstream science 200 years ago you would find that they are VERY different from the "truths" of todays science. 200 years from now accepted "truths" of science may not even remotely resemble the "truths" of todays science.
Much of what people take for granted as "truth" because they have read it in a reference book, news paper, or heard about it on the news may be BIASED. What they are getting isn't necessarily the "TRUTH" but the indoctrination of a particular viewpoint, theory, or interpretation of available facts. Some "facts" may even be deliberate contrivances and deceptions devised to intentionally keep you from the "truth" to protect hidden agendas. Get as many facts as possible from a wide range of sources
I think Wikipedia is an extremly helpful tool for dispersing knowledge and information...but like anything else it should be challenged and questioned I understand it isn't always 100% accurate but
what is? I think Wikipedia is more accurate than innaccurate...You can always cross referance using those whatchamacallit...uh books at that uhh...library or whatever it is placereferance...I don't think it is as off as some people say...I think a lot of people are more worried that it is free...
wikipedia and google make a lot of information much more accessible especially to people of lower classes, poor people who have to muster up enough energy just to walk down the street past other hungry, grumpy, possibly addicted, poor people with mental health issues brought on by their circumstances and environment...these people dont have encyclopedias and arent thinking about the dewey decimal system
You are an moron thinking that Wikipedia isn't reliable. I agree with paintball164 that you are an asshole.
I totally agree with him, Wikipedia isn't 100% reliable the thw whole time, but I NEVER saw a Wikipedia article that had incorrect information, or information is un reliable information.
So thus, you are an asshole.
3 guys says your an ass hole, guess how many there are in the world?
I have corrected some wikipedia articles with mistakes. For example the wavelength range of X-Rays were very wrong. One problem I do find more frequently is biased information on commercial companies. Just imagine how beneficial it would be for a company to edit its own wikipedia entry. Having said that Wikipedia is one of the best things to come out of the internet in my opinion.
i totally hate it when teachers bitch about wikipedia! thats y their teachers not doctors or lawyers or some other hard to get job! (when i say teachers im not talking about college professors) and college professors use wikipedia!
Shitipedia, or Wikipedia if you're too stupid to get that, is a VERY SHITTY way to look up ANYTHING! It's the majority, but get this, the majority of people are MORONS, and those who use that shitty site are MORONS!!! Use your head for something other than a hatrack, and DO NOT USE SHITIPEDIA!!!!!!!
wikipedia has all facts! whats wrong with it?? THAT PEOPLE CAN EDIT IT?? LMAO! WHEN YOU EDIT IT, IT GOES THROUGH THIS PROCESS THAT CONFIRMS WEATHER THE INFORMATION IS RIGHT OR WRONG!
Who says Wikipedia isn't reliable are totally morons. I use it almost every day and it might not be totally reliable but it is pretty reliable especially on TV shows, movies, video games, and so on.
it's "than" and not "then". What's wrong with the images? Do you read encyclopedias for their images, this isn't a magazine you know.
Another thing I forgot to mention is that wikipedia has terrible writing. You'll find grammatical mistakes on almost every article because they're not monitored by spelling experts.
Lastly, Britannica has tons of more in-depth content than wikipedia. Actually wikipedia encourages users to make articles shorter(I think there was a 80kb limit or something).
I didn't even mention i-vandals who keep messing up with content on wikipedia. While the major articles are protected, that doesn't apply to all articles. So it's fairly easy to add false info even without registering to the site!
Not to mention the foreign versions of the site which are updated once in a very lo-o-o-ng while.
I got an F I believe. You COULDN'T FIND THE INFORMATION ABOUT A FUCKING PYRAMID IN THE BOOKS HERE, SHE ASKED FOR SO MUCH INFORMATION ABOUT A FUCKING PYRAMID. I KEPT RUNNING INTO THE SAME SHIT BECAUSE I HAD ALL THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE BECAUSE ALL THE BOOKS DIDN'T HAVE EVERYTHING, THE BOOKS AT THE FUCKING LIBRARY.
IF I WENT TO WIKIPEDIA, I'D FUCKING BE DONE IN A DAY. Oh GOD.
Sounds like your problem is that you're lazy. I guarantee that if you'd paid even 1/10th the attention to your library orientation that you were supposed to, you'd have easily found enough information for your assignment.
By the way, I just vandalized the hell out of the Wikipedia page on Pyramids. I'll give you long odds that those vandalisms will NEVER be detected or reverted, and idiots who go there for info will be misinformed.
Users need to cite references for where they got their information, and it has to be from reliable sources, and when no references are cited, there is a message at the top saying "no references are cited" or something of that effect.
In 6th grade, (I'm 14 right now btw), we had to do a big project and we had SHEETS where we write the information of a BOOK where we got the information from. No, we couldn't use the INTERNET, no matter how much I pleaded. (continue in next comment)
Wikipedia...Wikipedia is the people's encyclopedia online, where people walk up, create articles, researched or modestly researched, and they get published or deleted depending upon the whims of those editors and administrators who happen upon them. It's basically crap on a screen.
Nah, I like Wikipedia, as long as it's a well-sourced article. I like how it's able to take a bunch of valid articles from elsewhere and combine them into one. Much better than seeking out each individual article. When it's an unsourced Wikipedia article or trivia mess, that's pretty much when I think "crap"... I really need the articles to be sourced or moderately sourced before I'll give any Wikipedia article the time of day.
I really like what you had to say about truth and learning. You got it right. :)
In terms of Wikipedia, I think it's the same concept. The "truth" continues to change, and therefore can continue to be rewritten and improved upon. Not only that, it's an otherwise free source of information, with connections and sources all across the internet. It can't be your only source, but it's a good place to start.
Majority of coincidental books = truth? As a philosophy major, I say we need to give the minority of sources the benefit of the doubt. Then again, philosophy messes with your head.
Anyway, what I like about wikipedia is that it gives a clear source it's citing from (well, most of the time).
Totally agreed! Couldn't describe that place as anything else that kindergarden classroom with a bunch of idiots talking all at once. great comparison. lol! And to be honest, you sounded like a wikipedia admin, particularly when u said "therefor I am an expert."
so do u have an answer? What makes you all abuse your duties so much. I hate to pin it all on you since I don't know who exactl you are and if I have ever dealt with you on an admin, but so many admins are abusing their duties and I doubt if ur thee exception out of the many that do. Care to answer that?
I wish they'd fix all the problems with that site. They have the controversies to prove that the site has serious problems. Particular these admins need to go. The admins currently running the site have proven that the form of adminship needs to be changed. Robert Ullmann, Jpgordon, Isotope23, Kwsn, Spebi, Ryulong hateful admins that constantly have absued their duties as administrator. Some non-admin users are bad enough, such as Ckatz and HiDrNick, but now they get to block. YIKES
Wikipedia sux. I heard that someone caught felons that were running that site and none of the administrators their follow the rules, making secret mailing lists. The website is still up because their are morons still contributing to it. Why would anyone freely give their time and efforts away to a site with this kind of reputation.
Mmm... wikipedia is acurate some times, and sometimes it isnt, but still is a source of information, and a source of information its something good, like the guy in the video says, if you have more, then it will be better, wikipedia is just one more source it depends on each one of us if we believe everything that says there and dont look in other places, then that is or problem not wikipedia's, so i think wikipedia is ok just as any other source of information
What if Einstein came out of nowhere, put an account on wikiepdia, and posted the laws of physics, and say u needed info on physics, and go to wikipedia first, then you would look at that and people today say its no good, so you ignore, go to another site like 4 days later and find the same exact same info on wikipedia and wasted all that time on that so heres the lesson on the day
Wikipedia= good or bad as long the person who made it is all facts
maybe wikipedia is a little inaccurate, and is prone to vandalism. But is better than lots of encyclopedias. And... what fount of human knowledge dont have misstakes??. And the most important thing... is not wikipedia one of the most (or the most) objetive encyclopedia??
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
lol! since you can edit wikipedia, with anything you want, i searched "string theory" on it and i edited the page. the first thing you will see is "cats are funny."
it has no revelence to string theory but, there you go. also at the very bottom of the whole article, i've wrote, "string theory is boring. i prefer to watch my dog lick his balls. har har it's funny. go on it! you'll see.
Wikipedia is started by a jewish porn merchant jimbo wales. Jews occupy most mid-east related articles while Hindu extremists (their allies) occupy all South Asian related articles.
People should check out the wikipedia watch website.
That's because Wikipedia is supposed to have a neutral point of view - the articles are not pro- or anti- anything. If a page appears biased, good editors seek to rectify it - whatever it is biased in favour of.
Hey buddy, we know what books are; and, we don't use wkipedia as our only resource. wikipedia, even though useless at times, can take some people out of hurries when the information is not in a library or simply a library is not accessible to them.
Wikipedia is VERY useful and important when it comes to the developing world. The big difference between the developing world and the west is not money, it's knowledge. That's where you find the most important aspect of Wikipedia. Free access for every human being to the world's collected knowledge will change the world.
There are a few pwople on wiki who are dedicated writers and try to improve articles but are often targeted by those try to push thier idealogy and point of view. When reading wiki, always check with another source (eg. books, website)
Dude, I so remember going to the library and researching in encyclopedias. Although, I was able to check them out so I could do work at home.
againstthetimes 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
its shit this is beneath the surface pure shit world's place for pedophiles!fuk dont CREATE FUCKIN WIKIPEDIA SHIT DONT SPONSOR IT, BEST STUFF AND ALL ITS LINKS BOOKMARK 100% TRUTH WIKIPEDIA-WATCH ORG!RULES!
wikipedosuk 6 months ago in playlist Wikipedia
Nice, speech, Chriss. I liked the retro-futuristic touch in the beginning.
madjestic 6 months ago
get to the fucking point!
MiddlinBob 7 months ago
supreme nothin GIVE TO ALL, PRINT ALL LINKS WIKIPEDIA-WATCH ORG WE SENT TO ALL UNIVERSITIES IN NORTH AMERICA!LOL!SUK ON THIS REAL HARD WIKIPEDOS LOLWY DIRTY LOWLIFES FOREVER AMEN!WE HELPED FUK UP EDPEDOS, NOW WE'LL FUK UP WIKIPEDOS SPONSORS LOL! NOTHING CAN STOP US! WE HAVE OVER 1000000 ACCOUNTS ON WIKIPEDIA, SORRY WIKIPEDOIA, PLACE FOR WORLDWIDE PERVS! DIGNUM LAUDE VIRUM, MUSA VETA BWEAR MORI, BRAVO, BRAVISIMO!!! WE 100% RULE, U 100% DRULE!!!
wikipedosuk 8 months ago
WiKIPEDIA AKA WIKIPEDOIA IS HUGE SHIT!
wikipedosuk 8 months ago
if truth were indeed relative in the sense that there is no absolute truth and what is true and false is relative to the circumstance or to the generation or to the culture or to the observer or self or any other subject, then there is absolutely no point in you making any arguments, stating any facts, making this video, going to school, reading a non-fiction book, or watching the news (though the latter may be a waste of everyone's time anyway), because the truth is not necessarily there
taylorbortnerathing 9 months ago
لول
MESHALHACKER 10 months ago
lockergnome
MrVivianmum 10 months ago 2
everyone is full of shit....... what ever the majority says at the moment is the truth even when there dead wrong people said and thought things such as the world is flat or people are witches with black magic powers so they most be burned alive lol individual people can be intelligent but humans as a whole are fuckin dumb as it gets
firstfirstandlast 10 months ago
Is truth relative? Or is the perception of the truth relative?
kennegun 11 months ago
In the 1960's declaring cigarettes were healthy was not the truth or a misconception, it was a LIE. They always knew smoking was bad, for a long time. They LIE to make money.
kennegun 11 months ago
Truth is relative? Wow!
FlyTheAirplane 1 year ago
Wikipedia restrictions are confusing. I can't upload any image, unless it's public domain, or has sharealikeattributeorsomeothercommonscrap which restricts you to now being able to get a certain image from just any place.
sweiland75 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wikipedia sucks. They intentionally censored out the fact that NH AG cum U.S. Senator Kelly Ayotte believes she can threaten to arrest which reporters she does not like at publicly-advertised political rallies held on commercial property
Watch this video at KingCast65:
Jimmy Wales and Wikipedia = bought & sold hypocrites who cannot be trusted
Their last excuse? I can't prove Kelly knows about it. Too bad I served her at her house. She & McCain love throwing out black reporters Stephen Price.
KingCast65 1 year ago
we have a subject at our school called critical thinking.
1ockedand1oaded 1 year ago
@ShiningDesertEagle That may be the strict definition of truth or the ideal of truth. But I think what he meant is that what people commonly refer to as the "truth" is often relative. For example many people claim the Bible is "true"/based on "facts" where as many people would argue otherwise.
alirobertson93 1 year ago
hes on some bad drugs mannnnnnnnnn
sheen1983 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Russian wives waiting gettop5.info
kelly3christina 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Online women for dating gettop5.info
KeeneBarajas 1 year ago
40 seconds into the video and I got why Wikipedia didn't give him credit .... simply putting ... you could kill this man simply by pulling the plug on his computer. he would die from the absence of I.T. XD...
asusp3v4x 1 year ago
Strange guy... Though, not the strangest. ^^;;
WolfLinkTriforce 1 year ago
Ban Wikipedia - thepetitionsitedotcom/1/ban-wikipedia/
16neelloc 1 year ago
LOL chris it's not the year 2090 :P
techsober 1 year ago
a book??? Those dusty things on a shelf??
Thyrthlord 1 year ago 8
@Thyrthlord Yes, try reading one sometime. It's an amazing experience.
thevoice81111 8 months ago
This is really fucking annoying. he should keep his day job, if he isn't an unemployed fucking loser.
TheTranceCartel 1 year ago
Just one word for you: MORON!
mrv1963 1 year ago
My friend uses to sell encyclopaedias ( did I spell rite?) door to door.
Long time a go. When knowledge was restricted and available only in
books, tapes and newspapers and radio, too.
Thaimaan Jussi
carsanookdotcom 1 year ago
i used an encyclopedia yesterday, but thats cuz im lame
chedarthehamster 1 year ago
are you kiding ? britannica is the biggest loser in the encyclopdia battle. it's like way too incomplete to be clasified as one. wikipedia shits all over britannica. and it;s only gonna get better.
Choice777 1 year ago
ADD THE TEXT BELOW TO THE ADDRESS.
BUBLOOGABLOO 1 year ago
/watch?v=20PlHx_JjEo
BUBLOOGABLOO 1 year ago
Wikipedia is not accurate!
choralstuart 1 year ago
@choralstuart so ? what is ?
Choice777 1 year ago
why do you keep doing quotes with your fingers
brianringer217 1 year ago
I guess most people who edit Wikipedia try to provide accurate information. As far as I can see, only a few douche-bags vandalize.
rahmanroni 2 years ago
Wikipedia is the best. Its actually as accurate as the encylopedia britannica
yungceezy10 2 years ago
@yungceezy10
LOL. Are you mentally retarted? Wikipedia is an unaccurate resource bullshit site.
I've found over 200 uncorrect shit there. READ BOOKS. STOP READING WIKIPEDIA.
Dept3k 1 year ago
While Wikipedia has its errors, so do books. No one source is free from bias but generally wikipedia is very good for finding out quick facts.
Wsupermain2 1 year ago
@Dept3k hey moron, you can take your book and burn them. we have the internet now, and it's here to stay. long after we burn all the trees. bbritannica is a complete piece of shit compared to wikipedia. wikipedia shits all over any othe encyclopedia. PERIOD. just give me 1 word that has more info in britannica than in wikipedia. i dare you.
Choice777 1 year ago
@Choice777
Really? When did I say Britannica is good? I dont even know about it you hoe. And besides, very pointless replying to a 2 months old comment. DIPSHIT. Go die son. Seriously, wikipedia is full of crap.
Dept3k 1 year ago
@Dept3k you are full of crap. you suck. you don't even have the right to complain about it, its not being made with your money, so just get over it, if you don't like it , don't read it, stay out of it. simple. who gives a shit about your pointles troll-like opinion. your born ot be a stupid little pupet that's never satisfied, always complaining, just becaues it's cool. lol. what an insect.
Choice777 1 year ago
@Choice777
Meh. Proves your grades in school fucking idiot.
And - Wikipedia isnt made of money in ANY kind of way? Except for hosting the website you damn fucker. there are 10 year olds writing articles. Now stfu. Get back to school fucking idiot. Hasn't your teacher told u u shudnt use wikipedia? DUMBASS
Dept3k 1 year ago
@Dept3k first off , retard, i didn't ask if wikipedia is made with money, of course bandwidth costs, it's made with donations. I ASKED if you contribue any money. since you DON"T move along worm. second, i'll let you in on a little secret. 10 y.o. kids have better stuff to do, it actually takes a bit of dedication to write a whole article or start one. And i'm willing ot bet that there are tons of PhD qualified or otherwise inteligent people that write, even if they do it anonimously.
Choice777 1 year ago
@Choice777 dude spread the word to end the word, jerk face!
chedarthehamster 1 year ago
Please support WikiMotion!
We are trying to create the largest video library for WikiMedia! Check our our channel and subscribe!
Thanks,
the WikiMotion Team
WikiMotion 2 years ago
wikipedia is not reliable resource because wikipedia is a complete joke.
The wikishit is done by liar CIA
KOYAINKA 2 years ago
Can anyone help me, I am trying to edit something in Wikipedia but there is NO Edit tab, but NOR is there a padlock sign....?
22poopoo 2 years ago
That means that the article locked, possibly because of vandalism.
emunews 2 years ago
Ok thanks :) It's just i thought there was meant to be a lock sign on the page but there wasn't.
22poopoo 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wikipedia's a cesspool for elitist faggots.
PhilipEbanks 2 years ago
he looks like colin farrell in In Brughs
Richierua 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
OMG! SO sorry! I'm just too scared!Ok.... There was a lady who was walking in the forest with her dog and was killed. If u r reading this, then u will find a dead bloody body hanging in ur closet. U will be haunted and killed by her. to stop it posti this to 6 other videos in 30 GOOD LUCK
cloudsotherchild 2 years ago
So archaic.
krayzgerman 2 years ago
I like how no one under the video (they one's typing) is paying attention whatsoever.
InsurgentLove 2 years ago
Wikipedia told me the first Americans were the marshmallowmen...
boredman443 2 years ago
wow, what a way to exaggerate! and in such a nerd way, so much overkill thats its not funny at all...
elgringiototote 2 years ago
Made me laugh
Nutane 2 years ago
oh gosh... I can not handle this level of nerdiness.. ugh.
kidneycat 2 years ago
Well no matter how much you bag on the people who never go to a library or research properly, you have to admit Wikipedia is still quite usefull no matter how bad or inacurate it really is...
MagicLink50 2 years ago
dude even teenagers know all this stuff so u dont have to air quote we arent mentally challanged
instantclassic92 3 years ago
No they don't. Yes you are.
cochranexyz 3 years ago
we arent not stupid dude so cochranexyz please shut up and figure out that only mentally challenged people are mentally challanged
instantclassic92 2 years ago
Although I was making a general statement, it's amazing what bullshit people believe. Or don't believe. Teenagers (and pre-teens) and post-teens: if what you're looking for isn't in google searches, it simply doesn't exist. College students are searching like they did as 4th graders: google. Point, click, duhhhhhhhhh. It's sad.
cochranexyz 2 years ago
oh i just love how people like u make stereotype statements newflash dude NOT EVERY TEEN OR PRE-TEEN DOES THAT i should know because i am one that actually works hard and doesnt just point and click and copy and paste and im done no i actually work hard so dude shut the fuck up and stop being a fuckin stereotype or else it will catch up to u in the long run dipshit
instantclassic92 2 years ago
WHERE NOT STUPID
cp6745c 3 years ago
LOL
n0directi0nh0me 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Wikipedia is an unreliable source of information.
Flintingstone 3 years ago
only if you take everything as complete truth.
redneck434 3 years ago
i watch the first min and decided that your not funny
miles192 3 years ago
We don't use papyrus for books anymore. Papyrus only grows along the NIle. Most books are made from tree pulp.
theshlauf 3 years ago
How can truth be relative? If two people have their own different views of "truth", then how can they both be truth?
n40798 3 years ago
I think what he meant is that our understanding of "truth" or popular "consensus" of truth or the official "truth" endorsed by the establishment and powers that be is relative. Like the "truths" of science for instance. If you read about the "truths" accepted and believed by mainstream science 200 years ago you would find that they are VERY different from the "truths" of todays science. 200 years from now accepted "truths" of science may not even remotely resemble the "truths" of todays science.
macolyis 3 years ago
Much of what people take for granted as "truth" because they have read it in a reference book, news paper, or heard about it on the news may be BIASED. What they are getting isn't necessarily the "TRUTH" but the indoctrination of a particular viewpoint, theory, or interpretation of available facts. Some "facts" may even be deliberate contrivances and deceptions devised to intentionally keep you from the "truth" to protect hidden agendas. Get as many facts as possible from a wide range of sources
macolyis 3 years ago
These "books" you talk of-- are they similar to movies you have to pay to watch? It's kind of fun to learn about our history.
unInnocentBystander 3 years ago
I only use it to find about rock bands. If I need to get info about science I go to specialized sites. To know about politics reas several newspapers
alcantara06 3 years ago
gewd thoughts, gewd indeed.
CorvidTabard 3 years ago
I think Wikipedia is an extremly helpful tool for dispersing knowledge and information...but like anything else it should be challenged and questioned I understand it isn't always 100% accurate but
what is? I think Wikipedia is more accurate than innaccurate...You can always cross referance using those whatchamacallit...uh books at that uhh...library or whatever it is placereferance...I don't think it is as off as some people say...I think a lot of people are more worried that it is free...
catgumart 3 years ago
ha ha ha
yes those books....i get your point but
wikipedia and google make a lot of information much more accessible especially to people of lower classes, poor people who have to muster up enough energy just to walk down the street past other hungry, grumpy, possibly addicted, poor people with mental health issues brought on by their circumstances and environment...these people dont have encyclopedias and arent thinking about the dewey decimal system
catgumart 3 years ago
You are an moron thinking that Wikipedia isn't reliable. I agree with paintball164 that you are an asshole.
I totally agree with him, Wikipedia isn't 100% reliable the thw whole time, but I NEVER saw a Wikipedia article that had incorrect information, or information is un reliable information.
So thus, you are an asshole.
3 guys says your an ass hole, guess how many there are in the world?
Joroshira 3 years ago
I have corrected some wikipedia articles with mistakes. For example the wavelength range of X-Rays were very wrong. One problem I do find more frequently is biased information on commercial companies. Just imagine how beneficial it would be for a company to edit its own wikipedia entry. Having said that Wikipedia is one of the best things to come out of the internet in my opinion.
hungryhippo2 3 years ago
You sir, are a genius.
blackngold29 3 years ago
i think im gonna cut ur ugly fingers
tupacdeathrow 3 years ago
Look at the truth.. Don't look at people which want to be on tv....
srvban 3 years ago
i totally hate it when teachers bitch about wikipedia! thats y their teachers not doctors or lawyers or some other hard to get job! (when i say teachers im not talking about college professors) and college professors use wikipedia!
paintball164 3 years ago
Shitipedia, or Wikipedia if you're too stupid to get that, is a VERY SHITTY way to look up ANYTHING! It's the majority, but get this, the majority of people are MORONS, and those who use that shitty site are MORONS!!! Use your head for something other than a hatrack, and DO NOT USE SHITIPEDIA!!!!!!!
pika62221 3 years ago
YOUR AN ASSHOLE!
wikipedia has all facts! whats wrong with it?? THAT PEOPLE CAN EDIT IT?? LMAO! WHEN YOU EDIT IT, IT GOES THROUGH THIS PROCESS THAT CONFIRMS WEATHER THE INFORMATION IS RIGHT OR WRONG!
paintball164 3 years ago
u NEVER KNOW IF FACTS R RIGHT OR WRONG
ALoserWithNoLife 3 years ago
You are an moron thinking that Wikipedia isn't reliable. I agree with paintball164 that you are an asshole.
TheStarTreker 3 years ago
Hes not even talking to me,dang calm down.Sorry for having a different opinion,sheesh no respect now adays :(
ALoserWithNoLife 3 years ago
Like you didn't make fun of me saying I didn't know how to speak and that is being respectful. Right. *Rolling Eyes*
TheStarTreker 3 years ago
I apoligize ok,just alittle mad
ALoserWithNoLife 3 years ago
Btw, I wasn't talking to you anyways. I was talking to pika62221.
TheStarTreker 3 years ago
Wikipedia is just a tool to confirm that I'm right or that people writing on Wikipedia is totally wrong .. I'm always right.
It does help me not to explain all my knowledge over an over again. Like, why a monkeys ass are red. Very important.
Hxxligan 3 years ago
wikipedia has moderators so it is reliable
randomafied 3 years ago
truth is relative = postmodernism
it funny huntercross made fun of chris and double posted he he
little8020 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wot the fuck do u know about Wikipedia anyway!!! u cant even speak clearly you geeeky bitch! ARe you uneducated???
huntercross14 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wot the fuck do u know about Wikipedia anyway!!! u cant even speak clearly you geeeky bitch! ARe you uneducated???
huntercross14 3 years ago
Wot the fuck do u know about Wikipedia anyway!!! u cant even speak clearly you geeeky bitch! ARe you uneducated???
huntercross14 3 years ago
Wot the fuck do u know about Wikipedia anyway!!! u cant even speak clearly you geeeky bitch! ARe you uneducated???
huntercross14 3 years ago
Who says Wikipedia isn't reliable are totally morons. I use it almost every day and it might not be totally reliable but it is pretty reliable especially on TV shows, movies, video games, and so on.
TheStarTreker 3 years ago
hAHA,U DONT KNOW HOW TO SPEAK.LOL
ALoserWithNoLife 3 years ago
Just shut up and go fuck yourself, dumbass.
TheStarTreker 3 years ago
Iron_Phreak: 3 <--<-<< = arrow in the ass
Dead giveaway the channel wasn't moderated at the time of the recording.
FlyFoxPrower 3 years ago
A HOLE YOU ARE AN IDOIT
webkinzstaduim 3 years ago
it's "than" and not "then". What's wrong with the images? Do you read encyclopedias for their images, this isn't a magazine you know.
Another thing I forgot to mention is that wikipedia has terrible writing. You'll find grammatical mistakes on almost every article because they're not monitored by spelling experts.
Lastly, Britannica has tons of more in-depth content than wikipedia. Actually wikipedia encourages users to make articles shorter(I think there was a 80kb limit or something).
mollymange 3 years ago
I didn't even mention i-vandals who keep messing up with content on wikipedia. While the major articles are protected, that doesn't apply to all articles. So it's fairly easy to add false info even without registering to the site!
Not to mention the foreign versions of the site which are updated once in a very lo-o-o-ng while.
mollymange 3 years ago
are you a nerd? you sound like it ( mr. oshman)
fatsocatso911 3 years ago
Wikipedia isn't reliable, try EncyclopediaBritannica at least it's professional and you don't have to rely on kid sk8ers.
mollymange 3 years ago
I got an F I believe. You COULDN'T FIND THE INFORMATION ABOUT A FUCKING PYRAMID IN THE BOOKS HERE, SHE ASKED FOR SO MUCH INFORMATION ABOUT A FUCKING PYRAMID. I KEPT RUNNING INTO THE SAME SHIT BECAUSE I HAD ALL THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE BECAUSE ALL THE BOOKS DIDN'T HAVE EVERYTHING, THE BOOKS AT THE FUCKING LIBRARY.
IF I WENT TO WIKIPEDIA, I'D FUCKING BE DONE IN A DAY. Oh GOD.
themangodess 3 years ago
Sounds like your problem is that you're lazy. I guarantee that if you'd paid even 1/10th the attention to your library orientation that you were supposed to, you'd have easily found enough information for your assignment.
By the way, I just vandalized the hell out of the Wikipedia page on Pyramids. I'll give you long odds that those vandalisms will NEVER be detected or reverted, and idiots who go there for info will be misinformed.
TensersFloatingDisk 3 years ago
Users need to cite references for where they got their information, and it has to be from reliable sources, and when no references are cited, there is a message at the top saying "no references are cited" or something of that effect.
In 6th grade, (I'm 14 right now btw), we had to do a big project and we had SHEETS where we write the information of a BOOK where we got the information from. No, we couldn't use the INTERNET, no matter how much I pleaded. (continue in next comment)
themangodess 3 years ago
You must have grown up in the era of stupidity. Libraries are still around, you idiot!
Samdog11487 3 years ago
Can you say 'humor'?
NiobProta 3 years ago
whooooaaaaaaa, this guy is BIG TIME NERD!!!straight out of a movie or a cartoon or something :D
LMAO, i actualy respect those guys, they're smart and they make technology progress,
of course sometimes they create biochemical atomic weapons, which are later used by totaly brainless politics, but thats another subject
DoDoDJZ 3 years ago
Poor nerd...
yafranco 3 years ago
Wow...did he say "nerds on tv"? What about the "nerds" on "youtube"? Holy crap! that's funny...He's a totally dumb nerd!
WikipediaLies 3 years ago
Wikipedia...Wikipedia is the people's encyclopedia online, where people walk up, create articles, researched or modestly researched, and they get published or deleted depending upon the whims of those editors and administrators who happen upon them. It's basically crap on a screen.
WikipediaLies 3 years ago
WikipediaLies, No. You fail. GTFO.
Person012345 3 years ago 2
Nah, I like Wikipedia, as long as it's a well-sourced article. I like how it's able to take a bunch of valid articles from elsewhere and combine them into one. Much better than seeking out each individual article. When it's an unsourced Wikipedia article or trivia mess, that's pretty much when I think "crap"... I really need the articles to be sourced or moderately sourced before I'll give any Wikipedia article the time of day.
Foergang 3 years ago 2
i was completely lost when he was talking about those acient "libraries" and "encyclopedias". what the hell r those?!?!
KllswtchOvrDrv 3 years ago 2
" "
willhasgame 4 years ago
I really like what you had to say about truth and learning. You got it right. :)
In terms of Wikipedia, I think it's the same concept. The "truth" continues to change, and therefore can continue to be rewritten and improved upon. Not only that, it's an otherwise free source of information, with connections and sources all across the internet. It can't be your only source, but it's a good place to start.
JoeSomebody2 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Wikipedia sucks. Just a jew/liberal run joke that parrots garbage illogical and bigoted leftist rhetoric.
Zarlok2 4 years ago
Type in idiot. See a pic of yourself.
quantitty 3 years ago
I have an encylopedia set.
dirtyzero1 4 years ago
I use Wikipedia as a way to guide me through a subject that I may not know much about. If I'm really interested, I look up specific things.
I always use a variety of sources though, because, as he said, everything is bias to a point.
keldog09 4 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
You don't say?
klingermash 4 years ago
Majority of coincidental books = truth? As a philosophy major, I say we need to give the minority of sources the benefit of the doubt. Then again, philosophy messes with your head.
Anyway, what I like about wikipedia is that it gives a clear source it's citing from (well, most of the time).
TietCanhVit 4 years ago
Totally agreed! Couldn't describe that place as anything else that kindergarden classroom with a bunch of idiots talking all at once. great comparison. lol! And to be honest, you sounded like a wikipedia admin, particularly when u said "therefor I am an expert."
crancrab1 4 years ago
so do u have an answer? What makes you all abuse your duties so much. I hate to pin it all on you since I don't know who exactl you are and if I have ever dealt with you on an admin, but so many admins are abusing their duties and I doubt if ur thee exception out of the many that do. Care to answer that?
crancrab1 4 years ago
some crap some idiots decided to stick on the internet to answer the title of this video. :P
Lormos2008 4 years ago
I wish they'd fix all the problems with that site. They have the controversies to prove that the site has serious problems. Particular these admins need to go. The admins currently running the site have proven that the form of adminship needs to be changed. Robert Ullmann, Jpgordon, Isotope23, Kwsn, Spebi, Ryulong hateful admins that constantly have absued their duties as administrator. Some non-admin users are bad enough, such as Ckatz and HiDrNick, but now they get to block. YIKES
crancrab1 4 years ago 2
Wikipedia sux. I heard that someone caught felons that were running that site and none of the administrators their follow the rules, making secret mailing lists. The website is still up because their are morons still contributing to it. Why would anyone freely give their time and efforts away to a site with this kind of reputation.
Tonetare 4 years ago
dude chill, go toke:)
StopPokeingMe 4 years ago
this guys is retarded
lolcuz212 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Wikipedia is a FAILED EXPERIMENT!
ilmisticoprofeta 4 years ago
Wikipedia is fun to vandal
qplqp 4 years ago
ooooommmmmmmmmmggggggggg :D
carl114CZ 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
lol look at this homo. you got fired from yoru show haha
freeuser21421 4 years ago
Lol @ 2:52 - 3:05
He is on crack. lol
torke191 4 years ago
Mmm... wikipedia is acurate some times, and sometimes it isnt, but still is a source of information, and a source of information its something good, like the guy in the video says, if you have more, then it will be better, wikipedia is just one more source it depends on each one of us if we believe everything that says there and dont look in other places, then that is or problem not wikipedia's, so i think wikipedia is ok just as any other source of information
chornie90 4 years ago
dude. Wikipedia is the Jesus of the Internet!
StewieGriffin613 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Wikipedia is a dangerous social experiment in the age of mis-information and progoganda we live in. It needs alot more supervision and expert input.
VUandChips 4 years ago
i've always found wikipedia to be accurate, jbut u dont have to agree with me
Blackhound192 4 years ago 3
What if Einstein came out of nowhere, put an account on wikiepdia, and posted the laws of physics, and say u needed info on physics, and go to wikipedia first, then you would look at that and people today say its no good, so you ignore, go to another site like 4 days later and find the same exact same info on wikipedia and wasted all that time on that so heres the lesson on the day
Wikipedia= good or bad as long the person who made it is all facts
flashman201 4 years ago 2
whoever thinks wikipedia sucks because people post it think this
flashman201 4 years ago
Obviously if you really wanna find the true (or the most close to the true) you cant limited to search in wikipedia, thats is stupid...
Tomoaki9999 4 years ago
maybe wikipedia is a little inaccurate, and is prone to vandalism. But is better than lots of encyclopedias. And... what fount of human knowledge dont have misstakes??. And the most important thing... is not wikipedia one of the most (or the most) objetive encyclopedia??
Tomoaki9999 4 years ago
Wikipedia is highly inaccurate.
irida90200 4 years ago
LOL and ur right
Arin322 4 years ago
lol this guy is mad nerdy, but mad funny a la vez hehe
ragstoriches919 4 years ago
wikipedia saves my life
T787898 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
lol! since you can edit wikipedia, with anything you want, i searched "string theory" on it and i edited the page. the first thing you will see is "cats are funny."
it has no revelence to string theory but, there you go. also at the very bottom of the whole article, i've wrote, "string theory is boring. i prefer to watch my dog lick his balls. har har it's funny. go on it! you'll see.
Eddynight 4 years ago
And your vandalism was removed 60 seconds later. GG
///MJ
MatsJn 4 years ago 8
But when I vandalised Wikipedia 18 months ago nobody removed anything. It's still there.
DavidGYoung 4 years ago
doubt it. there are bots who remove vandalisms.
flyingmonkeyskin 4 years ago
It's still there.
I keep checking and nobody ever bothers to remove it.
DavidGYoung 4 years ago
It's no there... I just looked.
MikeBurns315 4 years ago
It's not there.
flyingmonkeyskin 4 years ago
lol these things called books
pyroflasher 4 years ago
I agree its very unreliable, it may not seem so on the surface but the amount of inaccuracies is more than nominal when you look closer.
CoolJack2 4 years ago
get....to.....the......POOOOOINT
justBhappyII 4 years ago
BORING....
kannashiro8885 4 years ago
I'll be pretty afraid if someone doesn't know what a library is.
oakaleafy 4 years ago
yes e-mail me the links too
CommanderDixon 4 years ago
" " books
ofiro10 4 years ago
Wikipedia is started by a jewish porn merchant jimbo wales. Jews occupy most mid-east related articles while Hindu extremists (their allies) occupy all South Asian related articles.
People should check out the wikipedia watch website.
vmrgrsergr 4 years ago
i don't like cheese
xmaster333 4 years ago
That's because Wikipedia is supposed to have a neutral point of view - the articles are not pro- or anti- anything. If a page appears biased, good editors seek to rectify it - whatever it is biased in favour of.
daichi2097 4 years ago
Hey buddy, we know what books are; and, we don't use wkipedia as our only resource. wikipedia, even though useless at times, can take some people out of hurries when the information is not in a library or simply a library is not accessible to them.
siren56 4 years ago
Wikipedia is VERY useful and important when it comes to the developing world. The big difference between the developing world and the west is not money, it's knowledge. That's where you find the most important aspect of Wikipedia. Free access for every human being to the world's collected knowledge will change the world.
PowerExpress 4 years ago 6
There are a few pwople on wiki who are dedicated writers and try to improve articles but are often targeted by those try to push thier idealogy and point of view. When reading wiki, always check with another source (eg. books, website)
cvu91 4 years ago
do u have any proof?
cvu91 4 years ago
Wow this guys a bitch
smartestchild101 4 years ago
i'll second that
kayaksta 4 years ago
i third that
taeeat12 4 years ago