[20k]

If I want to look something up, I always check out wikipedia first. Its not always accurate, but its invariably a lot more accurate on most topics than random information across the web. Its also pretty easy to spot bad quality wiki articles once you get the gist of the site

Its amazing that wikipedia exists - there've been multiple hardcore attempts to kill it over the years for profit, but its still managing to go

[jbki]

Wikipedia is often the last on my goto resources to consult. The information is huge, but writing quality or style often irks me more than I can stand. I I always check Britannica first. If it's not there, then I move on.

[lostlogin]

Does this relate to a particular domain or field? I find it so good, and on the rare occasion I’ve found something wrong, I’ve fixed it.

[mettamage]

Hmm, I think this is an area where LLMs can be quite useful to make a wikipedia article more approachable.

[JKCalhoun]

"Its not always accurate"

Nor were encyclopedias which is what student me fell back upon before Wikipedia.

[oytis]

If the choice is between Wikipedia vs random information accross the web, then Wikipedia is undoubtedly better. But it doesn't have to be that, on many topics there are reputable sources to consult first.

[nephihaha]

There is very little "random information" on the internet which you can find easily anymore. The blogosphere is cordoned off by search engines as are personal websites most of the time.

Most academic papers are behind paywalls now. Which is maybe just as well given AI scraping.