Quote:
|
In the case of current events or politics, perhaps. However, if you look up jellyfish on wikipedia you'll get just about the same content as you would in Britannica. You're not going to use either for your thesis, but both serve well enough for grade school-level general research or internet forum discussion. Odd how I always mentally group those together.
|
The problem of accuracy also occurs in matters of history; there is sometimes the intent to re-write or manufacture history, hence the oft seen caveat a the beginning of many entries that some cite(s) or other in the entry must be verified or substantiated. And don't even get into the realms of religion or philosophy; the disparity there is off-putting. So, yes, for some "absolute" subjects ("a rock is arock is a rock"), it will do, but it is truly "Caveat Emptor" for other subjects...
Oh, and are you mentally grouping grade-school level with internet forum or Wikipedia with jellyfish? If it is the latter, I see what Freudian analysis I can find on Wiki to aid you...
...