Comment

Comment by jacobolus

If you never do research on Wikipedia, then fine, don't cite it. That's kind of irrelevant though.

> after all, primary sources are better

This is sometimes true, and sometimes not. For some topics, the Wikipedia article is an amazing overview, significantly better than available alternate sources.

> in the case the Wikipedia author was wrong, I will avoid a mistake

Wikipedia authors are not the only people who can be wrong. All kinds of sources, including primary sources and scholarly secondary sources, contain factual errors, sometimes subtle ones. You should certainly try not to say wrong things, which is why you should approach all sources with a critical eye.

But people cite non-primary sources all the time. The most important thing is to say where you got your ideas/claims, because when you don't, the result is misleading to your readers. If you get your claim from one source, but then cite a different source, that's terrible practice that causes significant trouble. But this happens all the time, and telling people to "never cite Wikipedia" is a major contributor.

parent jacobolus 9 days ago

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton