Listening to Mike and Mike this morning, around 9:15 or so and found out from Peter Gammons that he is a decendent of Revolutionary War hero Ethan Allen. Went on the web around 9:35 to see what I could find, and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Gammons already has this:
In an appearance on ESPN Radio's Mike and Mike in the Monrning on March 2, 2007, Peter revealed that his great-great-great-great-great-grandfather was Ethan Allen, one of the founders of his native state of Vermont.
Wikipedia is amazing! My favorite tool on the web.
in10s wrote:Listening to Mike and Mike this morning, around 9:15 or so and found out from Peter Gammons that he is a decendent of Revolutionary War hero Ethan Allen. Went on the web around 9:35 to see what I could find, and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Gammons already has this:
In an appearance on ESPN Radio's Mike and Mike in the Monrning on March 2, 2007, Peter revealed that his great-great-great-great-great-grandfather was Ethan Allen, one of the founders of his native state of Vermont.
Wikipedia is amazing! My favorite tool on the web.
You're right, Wikipedia is amazing and I will defend it to the death!
sox 06 wrote:I use it all the time for research, my teachers mad because they all hate it but I don't care.
You know it's people just like you and me that keep Wikipedia updated, right? That's like quoting something one of us posted here and treating it as the gospel truth in one of your school reports.
I'm sure it drives teachers bonkers to see stuff like that in your bibliographies.
sox 06 wrote:I use it all the time for research, my teachers mad because they all hate it but I don't care.
You know it's people just like you and me that keep Wikipedia updated, right? That's like quoting something one of us posted here and treating it as the gospel truth in one of your school reports.
I'm sure it drives teachers bonkers to see stuff like that in your bibliographies.
Yeah, citing Wikipedia as a source isn't cool. I will argue that the vast majority of people contributing to Wikipedia are pretty serious about it, and it might not be a bad starting place to find reliable sources... but in and of itself, Wikipedia isn't a source so much as it's a guide.
You'll notice that there is a very large and dedicated members of the Wikipedia community who are charged with checking the validity and appropriateness of articles. Although it's too large to be everywhere at once, in many cases Wikipedia is as reliable as Brtiannica, the gold standard in enclyopedic research.
My Librarian girlfriend wants to hate Wikipedia so much because it threatens the very concept of her profession, but even she admits for looking up random things quickly and casually, it's pretty useful.
sox 06 wrote:I use it all the time for research, my teachers mad because they all hate it but I don't care.
You know it's people just like you and me that keep Wikipedia updated, right? That's like quoting something one of us posted here and treating it as the gospel truth in one of your school reports.
I'm sure it drives teachers bonkers to see stuff like that in your bibliographies.
I like it because it's simple to read and it usually has a ton of info. My teachers don't mind it, they just don't like it to be my primary or only resource.
You shouldn't use wikipedia as a source. For all you know someone just made something up and posted it on wikipedia. then cited fake sources.
Heck you write anything you want on there, then cite it as your own words as a source.
"I do not think baseball of today is any better than it was 30 years ago... I still think Radbourne is the greatest of the pitchers." John Sullivan 1914-Old athletes never change.
It is cool, but I wouldn't use it as a 'final word' source.
7/26 - Cafe goes down:
General Error SQL ERROR [ mysql4 ] Table './cafe_forums/baseball_sessions' is marked as crashed and should be repaired [145] An sql error occurred while fetching this page. Please contact an administrator if this problem persists.