Like any source of information, you're better able to assess the accuracy of the information if you already know something about the topic. Reading widely is really the only solution.
It doesn't matter what the topic is. For example, my rather strong interest in the music of Tori Amos has led me to read a great deal of information about it from many different sources. There is plenty of false information out there (including on wikipedia, it always happens when a new album is coming), and I am regularly amazed by just how foolish and gullible a lot of the fans on Amos-related message boards are.
And it's because they haven't done their own research. If you want to be confident about your knowledge of a subject - any subject - you've got to do a decent amount of your own research.
Originally posted by orfeoIt's no more difficult than writing posts in this forum. Click "Edit this page"
I'd update certain wikipedia entries if I understood how. It all seemed a bit complicated.
and start editing. You can play around with it in their sandbox, until you get
the hang of it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sandbox
Originally posted by stockenI have made a number of contributions. Most of them have been to revert vandalism though. 🙂
It's no more difficult than writing posts in this forum. Click "Edit this page"
and start editing. You can play around with it in their sandbox, until you get
the hang of it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sandbox
Originally posted by orfeoWell said.
Like any source of information, you're better able to assess the accuracy of the information if you already know something about the topic. Reading [b]widely is really the only solution.
It doesn't matter what the topic is. For example, my rather strong interest in the music of Tori Amos has led me to read a great deal of information about it from man ...[text shortened]... owledge of a subject - any subject - you've got to do a decent amount of your own research.[/b]