News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious. Parent comment

Re:Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious by arp242 on Monday July 20, 2020 @11:16AM (#23898622)
> Time and time again I've found cited sources that don't say what was claimed.

I have similar experiences with Wikipedia; if I want to know about something I generally go to Wikipedia first and just loads a bunch of the references. They usually pan out, but not infrequently the reference simply doesn't contain whatever the Wikipedia article claimed.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious by TazeTSchnitzel on Monday July 20, 2020 @02:29PM (#23900525)
One of the problems with Wikipedia is that the citation syntax does not require (it's possible but quite rare) specifying what part of the preceding text the citation relates to. As a result it often covers, deceptively, only part of the sentence it's attached to, or the paragraph it's attached to, and it can get worse with editing which doesn't account for the citation's content.
[ Parent | on HN ]