• morrowind@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s my point, by mistrusting every other website, OP is violating axioms upon which Wikipedia is built, yet still claiming it’s trustworthy

    • Urist@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ah, I now see better what you meant. That is in part a fun little contradiction, but much of Wikipedia’s sources are books and articles that come in printed form. These are easier than other websites to verify as sources due to their tangible nature.

        • Urist@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Not really. Just sail the high seas with Library Genesis or Sci-Hub. The nature of being published is being non-editable, a digital copy is an okay compromise.

          EDIT: There is an issue of trust in piracy, though hardly in practice, but Open Access should help with this.