Yahoo! Answers

This is a great network of general purpose “Q&A” forums.

When you are stumped on how to reboot your frozen iPod or remove the latest pain-in-the-neck Trojan Virus that got past your Norton software, these forums are similar to knocking on your neighbors door and asking them to take a look at the problem. There are tons of very knowledgeable, eager to lend a hand surfers on the web.

They say the only stupid question is one that isn't asked. So, if you can't find the answer you are looking for, simply post a new thread for your own question. It's extremely easy.

The down side is that you are potentially getting misinformation from people just as qualified as you… meaning they own a computer connected to the internet. Take everything you get with a grain of salt and do as much fact checking as possible.

Wiki Answers

This is a better quality version of the same forums as set by Yahoo! Answers; however, the moderation of this site tends to weed out more of the scam artists and internet thugs. I also find that Wiki Answers has slightly less traffic than Yahoo! Answers, but that traffic is of a more expert nature. The responses on Wiki Answers to most formed questions tends to have a more in-depth, researched response as opposed to a “know-it-all-who-actually-knows-nothing” short-hand response like Yahoo! Answers.

But, again keep in mind that these are everyday people and their information can be wrong.

YouTube

I know what you're thinking… YOUTUBE? ARE YOU KIDDING?

To use YouTube effectively to educate yourself you need to be good at narrowing your searches. Most anything you are looking to accomplish, someone else has videotaped themselves doing it. Unfortunately, you have to sift through the mountainous pile of dribble and utter crap on YouTube first. But beneath all of the terribly done acoustic covers of songs that already sucked and videos of preteen girls dancing in front of the mirror, there is quality information.

I have watched videos on cooking, software tutorials, car repair, and music instruction. The good thing about a YouTube Tutorial is that unlike the text responses on Wiki Answers or Yahoo! Answers, you are watching a firsthand video and will definitely notice if the person in the video fails the objective.

ExpertVillage

I use Expert Village almost daily for guitar lessons and cooking tips. This site is absolutely awesome. There are videos and text files instructing you on nearly every topic you could come up with. The browse interface works fairly well and you could easily waste hours sifting through all the interesting topics.

The best part is that these videos are all recorded and hosted by ACTUAL Experts. Every post has a description of the person posting the video. Typically you'll notice that these are professionals or professors with decades of experience in the field of topic they are discussing.

Expert Village has an application process that sifts out the weaklings. If a user can't show credentials or a CV that supports their "expert" status they are not allowed to post.

The quality of this information is exponentially higher than any other site out there. The tutorials are broken up into short, manageable bits of information that are small enough to be streamed with even the slowest of connections.

This is the strangest clock/calendar I have ever seen. It's really cool!

Cool!!

This is the coolest handwritten clock/calendar that is very impressing. You may want to keep this in your PC. But, if you want an ambient clock, you should authenticate with Google to connect your Google Calendar to your clock here.

10,000 Coins Topple

There's a cool youtube video showing you 10,000 coins topple like dominoes. Those coins appear to be thicker than American nickels. Some of the motions may be a bit unnatural from the point of physics. It sounds boring when the coins move up and down the ramps made of stack of coins to the end. You may scream, “Coins, c'mon, move on!”

Greeting Hello in over 800 Languages

Now, you've no problem to greet the world “Hello” in more than 800 languages. But how accurate is it? I am doubt of its accuracy. I think some of the “Hello” phrases in Japanese are no longer used in everyday conversations. Of course, “konnichiwa” is always heard, but the dialectical phrases, particularly the “Kansai-ben” will probably appear awkward to the local people there as they are rarely used for conversation these days.

Get Lose in this Game!

This is claimed as the world's most addictive game. The U.S. Air Force Academy uses it to train its pilots. They've to stay alive in this game for as long as 40 seconds. The first couple milliseconds are the hardest part, but it will eventually become easy to pass through. Once you get passed 10 seconds, it'll go very fast. Its speed generally varies accordingly with your network connection or computer.

Can You Spin the Pen Like This?

Now, follow the music, and start spinning your pen as shown in the video. It's interesting, right? Can you do most of the tricks shown to pass your time?

What Codes are These?

These codes appear to me as ASCII art, and this website seems to be very odd and pointless. It was the weirdest website created in 1995 and its HTML source code reveals a detailed diagram of a hydrogen bomb. It is said to be a diagram plan for 2 types of nuclear form which can be found here.

What s Your BMI?

This is a type of BMI calculator used to measure your ideal weight. It requests your height, and frame size but does not ask for your gender. It will then give you a simple way to decide your frame size. You might have shocked at what you should really weight! But, I recommend the other website for an accurate calculation. Give yourself a try here!

Have This Website to Waste Your Time!

These are by far the most interesting and fantastic flash games to waste your time. There are a variety of games here to kill your boredom. These games are awesome, I particularly like “Turbo penguin”.

Very Funny Video Clip!

This is a funny youtube video clip. One yoga guy fights with 2 Kung Fu fighters in the movie called “Kung Fu vs Yoga”. Can a Yoga guy behave like this way?

Beware of TeenScreen!!!

TeenScreen is part of Bush's National Mandated Mental Health Screening program. This test takes 10 minutes to diagnose the mentality health of the kids. When it was done in Colorado, America, 71% of the kids who involved in this test were diagnosed to have a mental disorder. I am wondering how Bush would do on this test…Below is what I quoted from Wiki:

"This has become a source of controversy as some have alleged that TeenScreen is merely a scheme to market psychiatric drugs. [10] In addition, some of TeenScreen's executives and advisory board members have ties to pharmaceutical companies. [11] Some of the symptoms that TeenScreen uses as indicators of mental illness can also be caused by physical illnesses, allergies, poor nutrition, lacked of sleep, drug abuse, and toxic exposure. [12] TeenScreen refers students flagged by the screening process to psychiatric professionals."

Music GenreVisualization

This is a very cool but awesome website that you should give it a try. It's an iPod-like radio which enables you to listen to songs from many genres. There's a huge variety of music to suit your needs. Just click somewhere in the matrix: energetic/clam and dark/positive. The more on the right you click on, the more music to satisfy your ears. One unique interesting feature is that you can choose which years you wish to listen.

Build Your Own Search Robot!

This awesome website sounds great to you, right? Now, you can build a Search robot to place in search engines like Yahoo, Google, and other Web 2.0 sites. It'll also continuously scour social bookmarking sites like Del.icio.us, Digg and even other websites. Your searchbot is brilliant enough to search the web by color and the mood as well. Why don't you give it a try?

And You Thought Your Eyes are Good?

How good are your eyes? Can you find the “C”? I think this website is good for checking your eyesight too. If you can't spot the alphabet, then you've to get a pair of spectacles. Now, try this below, can you spot the “O” hidden among the “Q” alphabets? How many "O" did you find?

QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQOQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQOQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ

300+ UFO Photographs

Do you believe in UFO? By browsing through these photographs, you can feed your eyes with over 300+ photographs at your fingertips.

Creating the Stuff of Your Dream

This is a pretty odd, cool and weird website. Just click on the image and it'll change from a random set of images. Sometimes, you'll get the same combination of images for several times. There are 15625 possibilities to create your dream. Give it a try! Enjoy!

Also read

• Eight extremely powerful interactive websites to blow your mind
• Nine crazy and hilarious websites that went far away from the internet application

Barack's Digg Profile

Thats right, Barack's on Digg. If fact for a busy politician running for president, he's pretty active and has submitted and popularized some great stuff. Digg always has front page info about Barack, so visiting the popular in politics pages, you will find more than enough information on Barack news.

How Obama Stands On Almost Every Issue

A rundown of almost all of Obama's standing on issues from civil rights to the environment to corporations and war. If you're new to learning about Barack Obama, visit this site first to learn more about how he stands on almost all the deciding issues during a election. You can find his stance on almost anything here.

Obama's Facebook Profile

Like Obama's myspace page, his facebook page is very similar. The fact that he is reaching out through mediums such as myspace, facebook, flickr and twitter shows dedication to the youth and trying to connect with them and get them involved with politics and their country.

Barack's Twitter Account

Yeah. He Twitters too. In fact he has great tweets, and their not pesky or bothersome. An informative way to keep up with where he is, who he's speaking too and campaign news from Barack himself.

Baracks Official Wesbite

This link will take you directly to his official campaign website and stance on the issues. I have also included a link with a summary of more of his views in broader categories and his voting history.

Obama's YouTube Channel

Barack's youtube page is the first place to go for new campaign videos, videos of his speeches, meetings, debates and so much more. Almost 1200 videos and countless hours of everything you could ever want for in front of camera appearances.

Flickr Stream

It's pretty cool to see Barack's Flickr stream, where you see the pictures from a president elect's point of view, and not just user submitted photos of him. You can also keep up with where he is, because he has thousands of photos.

Barack's MySpace Profile

If you're a big myspace fan, friend him and check out his myspace. It's similar to his facebook and his official campaign page. Having a myspace page, hopefully he can connect with and encourage more of our youth to do more research and get involved with their countries issues.

Wikipedia Barack

Check Wikipedia for more information on Barack. If your not a wiki fan then go to his website. But wiki has a great database of information about his early life and early political career.

Official Voting History

Check Obama's voting history since being a senator. This is for you if you are a die hard fact checker, you can see how he voted during each of the sessions, on each issue.

Stance on Foreign Policy

A great question and answer session with Barack about his stance on foreign policy, from war in Iraq, to Chinese growth and development, to Iran and North Korea. Great to hear it quoted directly from Obama instead of it being transcribed ten times over by the mainstream media.

Daily Kos

Daily Kos is the biggest political blog on the internet and is a liberally leaning democratic grassroots blog. The idea is activism and contributing editors that are selected through the Kos community. Daily Kos will almost always be in discussion over Obama's political track, many times breaking news and uncovering follies of big media conglomerates.

Hopefully these websites will encourage people to learn more about Obama and educate themselves, their friends, peers and family. Becoming active in politics and issues that directly affect you is crucial, especially for our youth. Voting is the number one easiest way to get involved.

Wikipedia's policies are what provide the guide to creating a successful encyclopedia. They create a way to show what is needed in a user created encyclopedia to be successful. The policy about verifiability says that all information that is not common knowledge must be attributed to a reliable source. This means that even controversial material on Wikipedia must be supported by another source. Another policy reffered to as Neutral Point of View (NPOV) says that each topic must be explored from all points of views to create an accurate article on a topic. This allows Wikipedia to be a reliable source when learning about a topic

The community that creates Wikipedia is an essential component as it applys the policies on Wikipedia to create an accurate encyclopedia. It is also the people who work to keep Wikipedia an inviting place to find information. This environment is created by many advances in technology; most notably Wiki technology.

There are many sources of information on the Internet. Some have guidelines which help decide which information to add to an article. Often times the best place to find information, is the place that brings information from other places together. 

But there are a lot of other wiki's out there in the wilds of the Internet, some of which cover very unusual subjects. Here are ten for your enjoyment and bemusement:

Galaxiki - A Science Fiction & Fantasy Galaxy

Do you possess the desire to name new stars and planets? Want to impress your next date by giving her a solar system? Now you can with Galaxiki, a wiki for a fictitious galaxy. With a browsable map on the frontpage, you can zoom in and explore different areas of the galaxy. The Galaxiki community, over 2000 members strong, discuss and even write stories about their finds. There's also a very entertaining blog covering a wide range of topics in science fiction and fact.

Memory Alpha - Star Trek Canonical Wiki

This wiki's purpose is to be a comprehensive repository of knowledge about everything Star Trek. So if you're a Trekkie or a Trekkor or a Klingon or whatever, and you need to know what year James T. Kirk entered Starfleet Academy, this is the wiki for you. In fact there's over 27,000 articles to browse through! That's a lot of information for a completely fictitious subject.

WikiFur - A Furry Wiki

"The free encyclopedia written by and for the Furry community." Ah yes, Furries... those people who enjoy wearing cartoony animal costumes while rolling around with each other on hotel convention floors. One function of this wiki seems to be for Furries to register their name, so if you're wearing a duck suit while reading this article, you may want to stop by the WikiFur. This wiki also covers Furry conventions, comics, and, well, pretty well anything and everything Furry. This author would like to state that researching online articles can sometimes be a deeply frightening experience.

Wookiepedia - A Star Wars Wiki

Speaking of frightening obsessions, here's a wiki for Star Wars fans. There's over 50,000 articles in the Wookiepedia! If you need to know anything considered canonical about the Star Wars series, this is the place to begin (and probably end) your research. If you want to contribute, sign up to be a member and you can edit articles. But I imagine you'd have to cite real sources for any information you edit in the Wookiepedia; you probably couldn't change the entry for Luke Skywalker to read, "He loves pancakes." and get away with it.

WikiTruth - A Wiki Devoted to Criticizing Wikipedia

You know you're having an effect on the Internet when an entire wiki is created to criticize you. The operators of WikiTruth seem to really have it in for the founder of Wikipedia. There's also a lot of rumor, conjecture, and outright accusations on this site, which always make for an entertaining read. If you're hateful and bitter towards Wikipedia for whatever reason, WikiTruth will be your new home on the Net.

Fan History Wiki - A Wiki "Dedicated to Preserving, Documenting, and Writing Fandom History"

This wiki states that it is a "fan run project dedicated to preserving, documenting and writing fandom history." Fandom can be loosely described as the fans who love a particular book, television show, movie series, author, or artist. We're talking about people so obsessive that they will write stories ("fanfic") about their show. There's a fandom base for almost every popular movie, show, and book out there - and this website probably covers them all. There are also sections on sports, music, and videogames, too.

LoveToKnow 1911 - A Wiki of the 1911 Edition of the Encyclopedia Brittanica

This wiki states that the 11th edition of the Encyclopedia Brittanica is considered to be one of the best encyclopedias ever written. Their goal is to preserve the lengthy articles from the 11th edition and make them available online to everyone. It is a noble purpose; reading through this edition of the Encyclopedia Brittanica, one is impressed at the in-depth detail of the topics within. This wiki is looking for people who can help add any information about the 1911 edition of the Encyclopedia Brittanica. I recommend reading some of the historical entries; you'll discover details not often mentioned in today's historical records.

Uncyclopedia - A Wiki of Misinformation

Billing itself as "the content-free encyclopedia", Uncyclopedia's main purpose is to have hilarious articles containing wildly inaccurate "information". To illustrate this point, I clicked on the "random" link in Uncyclopedia and it took me to the entry about a walrus, the entry beginning with: "This article is about a confused walrus who thinks he is you and you are him and he is him and they are all together." And things devolve from there. Read at your own risk, and even dare to contribute if you think you are funny.

Naked Wiki - A Resource on Clothes-Optional and Clothes-Free Activities

Need to find information, resources, and lively discussion about nudism in a non-sexual context? The Naked Wiki is the site for you. There's only 83 articles in this wiki so far, and a lot of regional information needs to be added, but hey, where else are you going to find an online encyclopedia about nudism?

Alternative History - A Wiki of Alternative History

Here's an interesting idea: a wiki about the big "what ifs?" in history. This site has almost 4,000 pages relating to alternative timelines, and it's an ongoing project if you'd like to join. They are only looking for past alternative histories, not future, by the way. So if you have a good idea of what would have happened if Abraham Lincoln hadn't been assassinated, or if the Roman Empire had never fallen, or if hamsters had swarmed all over Winston Churchill during his famous radio address - just head right on over to this wiki.

You'll find other unusual websites through the above wiki's, by the way. And if you have a particular favorite and unusual wiki not mentioned in this article, feel free to post the link in the comments section below!

First, let's look at what the website looks like before we talk about the criticism. The website is www.wikipedia.org, which will take you to the main page. The main page has a small globe of Greek letters fitting together like a puzzle piece at the top left corner of the screen and the rest of the main page has various news articles. On the middle left of the page has Wikipedia's search engine and below that shows the different languages you can search with. Along with the main page, all of the articles are colored mostly gray and white with black lettering. All of the individual articles are changed and edited everyday by online groups or just random people.

The main debate as to why Wikipedia is so despised is because random people can change whatever article's information to whatever they want. Stephen Colbert, a popular comedian, who runs a satirical portrayal of T.V. news programs on Comedy Central asked Wikipedia users to say that the average number of African Elephants has tripled in the last six months. This change was done and other edits like this occur everyday. As I stated earlier, Wikipedia has more information than any other encyclopedia on the Internet and since people can change the information on it, it becomes unreliable because you can't defer from what is true and what isn't without checking your sources. Wikipedia often comes up on the most popular search engine, Google's first few web links whenever people search for anything online. Since Google is the main research tool web surfers use to look for information online and Wikipedia has become its main provider of information because of its abundant pool of knowledge, the despised Wikipedia has therefore became the Internet's main provider of information. Because Wikipedia is so unreliable and so many people use it, critics have begun to demean the database because they don't want the world using bad information to advance the population's knowledge. They especially don't want high school and college students using it because it will degrade their brains. Since the children are the future, it will begin the human races journey of devolution. All of these criticisms and points point at the quality of Wikipedia, but they don't talk about the one thing it has down, the quantity of information.

You can search for almost anything on Wikipedia and find an article or at least something relating to it. When you do find the sought after article, it has many other links to other articles relating to it within the words printed on the page. Such as if you searched education, the words teaching, learning, and skills are all underlined and colored blue to symbolize a hyperlink to the article defining it. Wikipedia is well organized, free, and also easy to use. It has many different applications for the constructive purposes of advancing knowledge.

There are a wide variety of articles on Wikipedia, some are constructive, some are entertaining, but do any of them actually have a point? Examples of good articles you could find would be like quotes from philosophers such as Aristotle, research info on when the Chinese Civil War was started, or the difference of its and it's. Those are all very intelligent, constructive articles to look up, but there are also many less enlightening articles to find and these articles are more likely searched for than the latter. For example, when the Rolling Stones recorded their first album, all the names of the villains from Batman, or the number ten most visited article on Wikipedia “List of Female Porn Stars” (Wikipedia). The reason it's so popular to most people is because it's an easy way to find information on anything you want. It's not easy to find organized info on the Rolling Stones or Batman. It's very easy to find information on female porn stars, but let's not go into that. It doesn't really matter to say Wikipedia is a bad source of information because the top searched for articles on the website prove that web surfers don't often look for quotes from wise people, how certain wars have started, or how to become a better writer. They look for factoids about trivial information that most scholars aren't interested in. Those factoids aren't not important, the factoids of society just don't contribute much to intelligence, they're entertaining, but they won't bring out a society of massive ignorance like the many teachers, intellectuals, and the editor of Encyclopedia Britannica, Dale Hoiberg, says it will (Wikipedia).

As I've already stated, many elitists of education find Wikipedia deplorable, but have they checked their own sources to prove this opinion? A World History teacher says to her students “Ok, you've got this big 100 point project due by the end of the month, you have to site at least 8 sources, and I'm only letting two of them be from Wikipedia”. She later goes on to tell her students that she knew one of the current Supreme Court Justices and she was reading his Wikipedia article, and to her dismay she found three mistakes at the bottom of the page. This was the reason her students could only use Wikipedia twice in their oral World History presentations. Many educators, such as this one, find Wikipedia to be unsuitable for education purposes because of undependability. A better alternative to this supporter of education would be the revered and costly website Encyclopedia Britannica, right? Incorrect, according to the British Journal “Nature”, Britannica had almost as many lies, factual errors, or omissions as Wikipedia did as they conducted a small research project using only those two encyclopedias as sources. Although they found that Wikipedia did have more errors with 162, Britannica came in a close second with 123 problems (BBC). This shows that quite often the Internet, which is hailed as the greatest unlimited source of information, isn't always correct even with so-called reliable databases such as Britannica. So therefore reliable databases are almost as bad as Wikipedia. Britannica is still better to use than Wikipedia because it has less mistakes, but it's still pretty worthless if it even has one. These mistakes are probably the result of amateurs running both sites.

Andrew Keen, a huge critic of Wikipedia makes the point that amateurs are ruining our culture. Andrew Keen has a Master's Degree in political science and in his book he blames the Internet, blogs, and user-edited websites of destroying our culture and once again making our society stupider. Andrew Keen went on Stephen Colbert's television show to talk about his book “The Cult of the Amateur” (Television). He brings up the point that we believe in the factoids put on the internet, like Wikipedia coming up on Google, as reality because we don't look anywhere else for good, solid, information about the past, present, and future of our world from intelligent people who actually know what they're talking about. He suggests that a group of experts should have a journalistic webpage to tell the real facts that people want to know about like info on Aristotle, the Chinese Civil War, and English grammar. And there should also be Wikipedia-like information such as Rolling Stones info, details about the villains from Batman, porn, or how the famous author Ray Bradbury said that public schools teach way too many factoids in their daily curriculums.

Ray Bradbury has many insightful points on education. On a video interview with Ray Bradbury, he said that all the information that people place value on today (excluding the areas of Math and Science) like the names of famous people, dates of history, or when a book was written, for example all of the information that Wikipedia offers, is completely irrelevant. All that unreliable information that Wikipedia offers and people have been arguing and scuffling about is completely worthless to the research projects that students have to do because it doesn't really teach you anything with substance. The names of people like Napoleon, Martin Luther, and Jesus are worthless if you don't know who they were, what they stood for, and why they were considered great men. The names and dates of wars like World War II and how it started in September 1939 is worthless if you don't bring up the fact that it started because of neglecting Germany and their quest for power because of it. None of the names, dates, and other information that schools present to their students and actually expect them to learn makes them think. The lessons that schools have their students complete are often centered on learning the information that Wikipedia easily offers without providing a lesson of how it applies to them individually. It doesn't make them think, they just learn the information, and puke it back up because it provides them no enriching thought-provoking substances. The information that schools have their students learn is basically grain alcohol, but to contrast if the lessons actually made the students think, the ethanol would instantly transform into healthy green vegetables. So to finally summarize, Wikipedia is criticized because education elites of today want the children to learn information from reliable sources when it's completely irrelevant to them anyway.

To summarize, Wikipedia is an over hated website that provides a mountain of information for free. It gets criticized because it's supposedly making the world a dumber place to live in thanks to children getting their information from unreliable sources. In my opinion, if there was a free (emphasize heavily on free) and reliable encyclopedia today that offered information on anything you could think of and today's education system taught students to think, we'd be all set. The Internet will remain a powerful tool for the advancement of humankind and we need to use it correctly if we are to survive. Wikipedia is a brilliant idea, but having it freely changed everyday is using the idea incorrectly. If we use it correctly and this era is referred to as the “Information Age” and knowledge is the collection of information, maybe the next era will be the "Knowledgeable Age”. Of course by then we"ll be smarter and there will be a cooler name for it.

Sheep dung, Brittanica , oh my!

Now, you must be thinking what most of my teachers are thinking. That Wikipedia is an unreliable, hacker filled, pile of sheep dung. Well, that's what I thought when I first read about, and viewed various Wikipedia pages. But, later on in my life I have come to the conclusion that Wikipedia is a far better source of information than places like Encyclopedia Britannica, and InfoPlease, mainly because of a study that was recently conducted by Nature Magazine. This study showed that Wikipedia has 4 errors to Brittanica's 3 errors in the average science article. But here is the funny part, one of Wikipedia's errors came from a book that was written by a staunch anti-Wikipediaist. So that makes Wikipedia even with Britannica.

Truth vs. Fact

I really love this subtitle, "Truth vs. Fact" that makes almost no sense anyway you think about it. Yet, there is a very subtle difference between truth and fact. That difference is that facts are like mass, it will always be the same no matter what the force of gravity is. But truth is like weight, weight is dependant of factors like gravity to define its total.... wait for it... weight. So, basically my point here is that the people who write Encyclopedia Brittanica can all believe in one truth, even if that truth isn't really practical. For example, to the Nazi's Hitler was correct and truthful about the Jew's being the source of Germany's problems, yet the fact was that Germany was suffering because of the agreements that they made with the Allies after World War I. So, if you see something that is the truth, you can change it to the fact.

User Fixability

As a person who takes great pleasure from getting down in the dirt with beta's, alpha's, pretest's, and the likes of those, when I see that someone is calling the Phylum of an Amoeba "Crudeacrestantus" when it should be "Amoebozoa" I can't change that with school databases, or Encyclopedia Britannica. With Wikipedia it would take me all of 30 seconds that fix the classification of that poor little Amoeba. If you were to suggest a fix for Britannica, you would have to submit a formal error fix form, and back that up with proof, and then back that proof up with testimony from people in the profession. Then show that those people in the profession are actually in the profession. Finally you would have to wait a considerable amount of time before you would actually see the change. So several thousands of people would see it prior to it being fixed.

Community

I love communities. I love forums. I love chat rooms. They are places where I can sit down with a cup of grape juice and enjoy the technological company of others. Wikipedia offers this type of thing with Talk pages, Discussion Pages, and History Pages. But other encyclopedia (especially book copies ;-) ) lack these features. The main advantage of these pre-installed communities is that you can discuss and debate what should be in an article or not, but it is also a great place that you can kick back and chat about what has happened in real life.

Conclusion

So, if you want to get decent information from a reliable source, for free, that spans over 2,138,523 topics, Wikipedia is the way to go. But if you would rather cash out and splurge on boring old Britannica, with its aggrandizing words, complex phrases, formulas, and unhelpful errors, then shell out $69.95 for the online service (or a whooping $1,325.05 for the books!). Or, on a lighter note, if you prefer things that everyone has their say in then Wikipedia is the way to go.