It's good for surface level stuff. The apolitical superficial knowledge is where wikipedia excels.
> I find it frustrating when friends say it's unreliable/not to be trusted.
In terms of depth and breadth of knowledge of topics, it is sorely lacking. And it is highly untrustworthy when it comes to anything remotely political/historical/economic/etc - which are ultimately all political.
> Of course it's not perfect, but I've learned plenty enough from it to be well worth the trade-off
Definitely. It has it's uses like everything. But it is extremely flawed.
It's good for surface level stuff. The apolitical superficial knowledge is where wikipedia excels.
> I find it frustrating when friends say it's unreliable/not to be trusted.
In terms of depth and breadth of knowledge of topics, it is sorely lacking. And it is highly untrustworthy when it comes to anything remotely political/historical/economic/etc - which are ultimately all political.
> Of course it's not perfect, but I've learned plenty enough from it to be well worth the trade-off
Definitely. It has it's uses like everything. But it is extremely flawed.