Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

No they are not, which is why Wikipedia doesn't rely on them. All information on Wikipedia is supposed to be verifiable via a reliable secondary source (books, newspapers, etc from publishers with a reputation), so anything written by any editor can, if unverifiable, be removed by any other editor, anonymous or not.


Agree. That's what some people seem to not understand or overlook.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: