Here you go Greg. This comes from a scholarly debate with Queef concerning the merits of using Wikipedia as a source in debates and research papers.
Originally Posted by rwhisen
I merely posted what academics have said, you're the one who claims Wikipedia should be taken seriously. I tend to lean towards the academics, no offense. You haven't a leg to stand on but don't let that stop you from going down swinging for Wikipedia.
Any thing that must be referenced in the bibliography WITH the time and date because it is subject to change should not be used as a reference as it is too volatile and tertiary. I can make up a fact, insert it in Wikipedia, screen shot it and cite it in the bibliography of a paper. As bad as CNN.