Quote:
Originally Posted by Romanus
*By definition, it's extremely labile, which makes nearly worthless as a serious research tool *alone*. Yet, people increasingly point to it as a single, authoritative source; if I ask someone on a board what the 1960 Chilean tsunami was, you can pretty much bet I'll get the Wiki page on it before any other--this when there are about 46,000 hits on it through Google.
|
http://www.google.com/search?source=...=Google+Search 58,200 hits for 1960 Chilean tsunami
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special...+tsunami&go=Go
but no wikipedia article.
Hmm ... but I got your points. Interesting.
I didn't vote in the poll because it didn't have my option. If this was a wiki I could add it.