Professor Wikipedia
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 сен 2024
- The funniest video of the year. [Citation needed.]
See more at www.collegehumo...
Free CHTV video podcast on iTunes:
phobos.apple.co...
CH Facebook Fan Page:
/ 6363207806
Watch this on CHTV and view credits at www.collegehumo...
How about professor urban dictionary?
That would be cool
YES YES THEY HAVE TO MAKE THIS
YES!!!
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cookies !!! :DDD
I would not want to see professor Deviantart.
Recolours, porn, and art theft, all of it.
Don't forget the fanboy/girl-ism, not being able to take criticism, and blocking people for no reason.
Nicolas Rios I could easily imagine that in the classroom.
*Possessor DA turned his head towards Zancrispy after he had told the elder that his character soniX had Gary-Sue characteristics. DA clenched his fist and screamed "TROLL!" before putting Zan in the corner for trying to help. *
I think Professor DA would be the art teacher.
Professor DA: " Now back to our lesson. To make an orginal character you take Sonic and make him purple. And that's my completely original character, SoniX. Don't steal or recolor plz, if you do you are not a true artist. Now if someone tries to hate on your art, you should make a picture where you flip them off and say 'Fuck the haters.' To show them how much you don't care."
Nicolas Rios "... And make sure to sell prints for an expensive price and complain when people don't buy them, that way you can make more shitty artwork whining about your shortage of prints sold."
Why do I get the feeling that most false information on Wikipedia was edited in by people trying to prove how untrustworthy the site is?
They can't do that anymore most pages now are locked
I Love Horror Movies wow this is the first time I heard about that. After a quick search there are indeed some blocked Wikipedia pages.
I have to disagree that most pages are blocked. The pages I visits are almost never blocked but I mostly read boring science pages.
A lot of it literally is edited in by college students and teachers to show during class and bring up in debates to say that wikipedia is not credible. It's funny when the edits get fixed before they present them during or after class and i can just say "Look, perfectly credible. What was your point again?"
WeActOnImpulse Official To build on your point, Wikipedia now has an automated vandalism detection system installed which will get rid vandalism very quickly. Also, if you vandalize pages, they will revoke your account. So a lot has changed since this video was uploaded.
knight wing True. I read a whole article about it on the verge
"Don't you just hate it when Wikipedia copies your homework?"
-Random student
+GlockProductions ™ OMG I seriously hope that you didn't make that up and you heard someone say that.
I have actually heard a kid in my English Class back in my sophomore year say that when the teacher stated his homework was identical to the Wikipedia article on the same subject.
+Phantomhive: Was he really dumb though? Or was he super smart?
Guy was part of some Hispanic gang, the "Chavos" or something.
Of course he was a fucking idiot, man.
Wikipedia has a self correcting system kind of like science
Wikipedia has never once let me down
Not ever.
like
Well, you have to be smart enough to tell if the information is true or not, so...
WIkipedia is full of horseshit, especially when it comes to history and politics.
+Jeremy Nuiscence well it's never failed to do my homework :)
Anyone else feel bad for professor Britannica?
yes
Yeah...
yeah..... he's just..... all alone. it's sad
is that really a thing
Yes, but Professors Funk and Wagnalls can go suck it.
Step 1.... Try to edit something on wikipedia
Step 2.... Realise nothing change. And it's only an request..
Step 3... Forget step 1 & 2 and claim wikipedia to be unreliable
John Johnson I click edit and I can edit anything right on the spot. Not a request, just an actual edit. However if I change things to incorrect info the Wikipedia community is so big that with in a couple hours if not minutes it just gets undone and if you continue to change it it gets reported and your IP address can be banned.
Kartkid024 Try and do it. Then enter the same page from another computer. It's an request.
It works just fine for me. I change it then click enter then check it on my wife's computer and the change is made. In fact I have had people edit some of my stuff not seconds after I posted it. Now I do post regularly to Wikipedia so I'm not sure if that plays a factor in it at all, but it does post immediately for me.
John Johnson Well, this video is from 2008 so... yeah, that.
John Johnson If your reputation on wikipedia is shit, you wont be able to edit much.
Back when CollegeHumor was humorous and about college...
***** Said the pot to the kettle.
+Daniel Stearns I just want to say, I love that expression
Ohh I member that
The inevitable retrospective comment? I'm disappointed.
>Using greentext in RUclips.
Are you serious.
Professor RUclips would be fun
I would hate music class if that's what he taught. Most of his songs would be 10 hour loops.
***** I told my parents I'd have just one more lecture.
And your professor gives two minutes advertising. Sometimes you tell him to shut up and he will move on, sometimes not so lucky.
MaeLSTRoM1997 A 60-second ad per 2-3 minute video? I'll pass on Professor RUclips!
"Mr. RUclips, can we learn about the pokerap?"
-Where are you getting these facts?
- I don't know
Everytime at school...
Brilliant
*these :|
sorry you are right
My grandad is a real grammar nazi.
He was a nazi in ww2 and affter the war he became a english teacher
+須田みずほ That's just not something to be proud of. Especially knowing all the terrible things nazis did to jewish people, like myself.
+Someone - Don't feed the troll, you're only giving him attention.
Wahaller I didn't.
+Someone - wow salty jew. im german, and guess what im proud. and i feel like germany is not at fault at all.
+Someone - Why are you crying over something that happened near a century ago?
Teacher: Wikipidia isnt reliable
Student: But why?
Teacher: Because it is not a official source [ then opens a 40 years old book]
+Augusto Semper Did you just try to compare wikipedia with academic literature? Besides 40 years old doesn't necessarily mean that it's wrong.
I'm speaking more of Science subject because i have seen in many cases of teachers (In Colombia) that say something very wrong and when you debate with them they are like "is in this book", but my intention wasn't harmfull to any academic source or person, just critic to the method teachers in my countrie use.
+Anton Arvik
A lot of it is actually wrong, though.
Good example: Civil war was actually about taxes.
There are memoirs from actual soldiers of the period that explicitly talk about the tax hikes leading up to the war.
Plus, Lincoln, himself said that freeing the slaves was secondary and that the war was actually about maintaining the union of the states.
Other things they lied about or didn't teach at all:
1. We reinstate the Shaw in Iran in 1953.
2. He's overthrown, Operation Eagle Claw, etc.
3. We give Saddam weapons and *take him off the list of known terrorists*.
What could possibly go wrong?
4. We defeat them and Saddam's former Republican Guard becomes Al Qaeda.
5. Gulf War II.
6. Al Qaeda becomes ISIS.
7. Syrian War.
How to do taxes.
How to invest.
Anthropology (the study of why the fuck we even exist).
Fiscal policy. (GDP * tax rate = government income = fiscal allocation + deficit/surplus)
There are now *FIVE* branches of government. Executive, Judicial, Legislative, Oligarchy and Lobbyists.
Etc.
+manictiger Depends on the subject and if it was really used by his prof. then it's okay to use it.
andariel125
I was talking about the American School system. It teaches a whole lot of nothing.
While this is actually pretty funny, it's important to bear in mind the fact that in direct comparisons between articles, Wikipedia is on average more accurate than the Encyclopedia Britannica. Pretty impressive.
Yep, its almost as if good moderation and large amounts of people researching things means that by and large its a great source of information. If only anyone in education would see it that way.
Brazilians sure know a lot of stuff...
Mormon Jesus Yes, unfortunately a great deal of teachers are rather against it. At least the ones that I knew.
Mormon Jesus The guys at my college encourage us to go on Wikipedia ;)
Dragonk116 Mormon Jesus
One of my uni lecturers encouraged us to check "real" sources but he then said that, no matter what he advised, he had to accept we will end up using Wikipedia.
Interestingly, some lecturers actually put Wikipedia articles in our "required readings".
Unanimously though, no-one accepts Wikipedia as essay references.
Boy have times changed. Wikipedia used to be super unreliable but now it's great.
Yeah, I've compared Wikipedia to Britannica and the good Wikipedia articles (the good ones, mind you) are much better than Britannica's. More details, more neutral tone, more up-to-date facts, etc. The articles on the making of Star Wars are certainly a heck of a lot more detailed and accurate than Britannica's.
My friends in school and I would do a race through wikipedia to see who could connect two unrelated topics the fastest by only clicking through links on pages.
For example... Eggplants to Moon Landing.
Who ever gets to Moon Landing page first would win
Lots of fun!
i would love to try that
It is very fun!
There's an actual website game for that, but I forgot the name of it
Eggplants > North America > United States > Apollo 11 >Moon Landing
The wikipedia article on it just calls it "Six Degrees of Wikipedia"
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Six_degrees_of_Wikipedia
Anyone who thinks Wikipedia is wrong, is wrong.
Though this is funny :D
Search for the church of scientology edits on wikipedia.
lololololololololololololol i prefer not to :D cuz i dont want to be proved wrong :D
no...definitely not, it's just ur opinion
But,if you were PROVEN wrong,would that be bad?
nope, why would it ?
"Actually I think it was 1899"
"Then that's what I'll tell everyone from now on"
Kelly Cowley actually it was in anus
I want the Nobel Prize for Moustache now...
wikipedia is great. always the first place to research something
Only as a toe-dip though as a test for the waters to come.
Shane Bowman We are all gonna end up reading and learning from other people's work and findings. How many of us have the opportunity and the desire to find out the fact ourselves?
Van Vu Of course, but as always, it's not good to rely on one source. If you're talking about checking a quick fact, then yes Wikipedia is fantastic as one of those sources.
Proper research though assumes you have the desire and opportunity to go further than just a popular wiki page.
Shane Bowman Oh I meant really looking into things ourselves like if you want to know about DNA, you would have to see the A,T,X,G yourselves. That is the best way to understand stuff
And change it if you don't like it.
woah what happened with Britannica, felt like it suddenly took a dark turn :(
Guys this was posted during the days when anyone can add whatever they wanted. Wikipedia is fine now but back then it was unreliable.
Was that during the year ANUS?
Man, this video was uploaded in 2008.
Dave B. Yes it was in the year ANUS. According to Wikipedia anyway...
Graysongdl I could've sworn Wikipedia said it was uploaded in Ass Snail.
***** Sorry I think I read it wrong, Wikipedia says it was in the year 1337NESS
I love that guy just yelling
"VANDALISM!"
Wikipedia is a great place to start. then after you have found some facts you can google them to double check.
or check the source cited
that to, thanks for the addition friend
They made a mistake in the Maxwell equations at 2:44. The cross product of the electric field is 'minus' the partial derivative of the magnetic field with respect to time. AM I COOL NOW!!! PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE MY INTELLIGENCE!!
Robert Fennis *givesCookie* here you go
aednil yeeeyy
Robert Fennis One particle of unobtanium has a nuclear reaction with the flux capacitor, carry the two, changing its atomic isotope into a radioactive spider.
Roshireu Oh jeez, what was that from!?:D
Robert Fennis 21 Jump Street lol.
"You can't actually change anything in Wikipedia…[edit]
…you can only add to it, not change it. Wikipedia is a database with a memory designed to last as long as we can make it last. An article you read today is just the current draft; every time it is changed, we keep both the new version and a copy of the old version. This allows us to compare different versions or restore older ones as needed. As a reader, you can even cite the specific copy of an article you are looking at. Just link to the article using the "Permanent link" at the bottom of the left menu, and your link will point to a page whose contents will never change. (However, if an article is deleted, your permanent link will only work for administrators.)"
-Wikipedia
Learn your facts, I hate whenever someone discredits wikipedia, and says an unreliable source.
you can edit everything on wiki except for presidents and military and such
This video was made from 2008 thought, wikipedia was probably a lot different back then
Depends on what you use it for. But every academic I know has used wikipedia for checking quick facts.
As a college student I must defend the honor this valuable and amazing resource that helps me to cheat on my homework. For shame CH!
this video is from 2008. wikipedia is better now
2:05 One of the makeup artists is "Your Mom".
And Bib Fortuna XD
Bib Fortuna, too
Renn The Bear I was on my phone when I commented that, didn't mean to copy you, sorry.
Top
knight wing And Phill Tippett (Jurassic Park Dinosaur Supervisor. He had one job.)
Professor 4Chan.
I'd like to see that.
Hehehe...
Professor 4chan: Our test today is YLYL
student 1: lol u tk h|m 2 da bar/?
student 2: *holds up picture of banana*
student 3: check 'em
student 4 throws child porn pictures around the room
Professor 4chan: All of you guys are banned permanently for being fucking retarded.
WeActOnImpulse Official i would love to see that
Avortement Raté Don't be ridiculous. Everyone knows the Jews aren't at all doing half of what /pol/ accuses them off.
The gun at the end is suppose to attribute the three dots used at the end of every fact in the Britannica Encyclopedia.
I love Dr Strangelove.
Will meet again some sunny day. ;)
We'll meet again, don't know where, don't know WHEN
"If you can't explain it successfully to your toddler relative or your grandmother, you don't truly understand it."
Therefore, I don't understand cunnilingus.
"Licking a girl's lower lips" seems to work fine for a toddler.
Aaron Richards
Gonna be honest with you fella. I was just rehashing SMBC material.
Imagine trying to explain electronics then..
Professor Urban Dictionary... "Now class, Chemistry
is the only natural science that can be broken down into the categories 'making drugs' and 'blowing stuff up'."
Now they *have* to make that video..
At least they're learning things. I had Professor Encyclopedia Dramatica last year and didn't learn shit. All he did was tell racist jokes and show us gay porn.
I once had Professor Jones. He always seemed to disappear for weeks at a time...
EariosRandomness
Do you mean Henry Jones jr? He hid in the fridge. Or he shot swordsmen. He loved to shoot swordsmen.
Dr. Gün Graziano
*died in a fridge*
I once had Professor Tumblr. All he, wait, he prefers the pronoun kle, so kle diagnosed us with disorders and showed us gifs all day. When we failed test kle'd show us depressing things while listening to depressing music before looking at more gifs.
Haha, I confused that Professor Encyclopedia Dramatica with a Professor I had. I don't remember his name exactly Encyclopedia or Handbook of Drama or Theatre, something like that. He also showed gay porns, mostly about english kings and he told racist jokes but very old ones. I liked that until he broke the fourth wall.
Don't you hate it when wikipedia copies your homework :(
What? Does it really happen? How?
Usually it's me who copies from wikipedia. Please explain.
Okay I get it.
I think that was sarcasm/
Prof Wikipedia should have a meet up with the Google Guy :D
Professor Britannica actually had useful shit written on his chalkboard.
Yeah but what do the Maxwell equations have to do with historical state capitals ?
goomba008
Nothing. See if he's actually the physical manifestation of the Encyclopedia Brittanica he's gonna know a lot more than just one subject.
***** FUCK BOOKS!
Professor Britannica is awesome. I have some of his books.
woodlefoof2
Personally I've always been more into reading books but you can do what you want with them.
That Wikipedia professor is an artist, genius and is cool sounding.
And Sonic since he can cover an entire board by just flipping it.
HAHA LOL
Wiki is very useful, it depends.
They should so make a if google was a person where google directs questioners to Prof. wikipedia.
College Humor used to be about college?
Oh come one, I would be in Britannica's class. It's so much more accurate.
It's funny that despite being academically accepted with research to back it up, the Britannica is always having parts amended for being wrong. Just like Wikipedia. In a sense, the Wikipedia is just a knock off of the Britannica but contains more information. For the most part, much of the information in the Britannica is found on Wikipedia. It's just reworded to avoid stealing it's work.
Imho, there isn't much reason to steal from britannica. Encyclopedia britannica having fewer errors sounds good, until you notice that for the average hard science topic the EB article is only a single paragraph that would be considerered a stub on wikipedia, while wikipedia has an actual article that would take 10 pages if printed. I eventually gave up on EB entries completely since the articles were often useless.
Of course you're going to have fewer errors if you have one tenth of the content.
What was the joke with Britannica here? That it's outdated?
+Leonell Valderama old, outdated and no one uses encyclopedias anymore now that everything is online.
+Leonell Valderama
I think more that unless you keep buying the newest one then what you have will be outdated.
+Hi O'Laverly
Same. I used to read them when I was 8.
I learned more from World Book than 12 years of school.
Either that's because school is borderline useless or--
Well, yeah; it's that, but still.
+Leonell Valderama The joke is that Britannica actually has reliable information, but everyone just keep hanging on to wikipedia even though it is the most toxic place to go to for information.
Deronia
Wikipedia is useful as a compilation of sources and finding related articles.
It's not hard to click on the little numbers which are hyperlinks to the references.
People that use _"you used Wikipedia, your argument is invalid"_ as an argument without looking at the references, are just not interested in rational debate in the first place.
Anybody remember Encarta?
It was the coolest shit when I was in middle school.
SoloMael Holy shit, that's right! 😀
Brooooooooooooooooooooooo.
Everyone knocks wikipedia for being unreliable, but in the thousands upon thousands of wikipedia pages i have visited, all of the information on the page appeared to be perfectly accurate with amazing descriptions that helped me understand various concepts in physics, science, computer sciences, math, and more.
Actually, Wikipedia is pretty well regulated. Every wikipedia article requires that you list your sources when writing or editing an article. If an article doesn't have any citations, or looks like an ad created by a company, the article will contain a disclaimer before it. Not to mention that there is a whole community of editors that work really hard to make sure that wikipedia is accurate. But yeah, if you want to trust a wikipedia article look at the links to the citations at the bottom. That will usually tell you if the information is accurate or non-biased.
No, not ABSOLUTELY everything needs a cite, I've made plenty of uncited edits, sometimes someone will get on your back about it, but not always
Exactly my point! my teachers HATE it, but wiki sites its sources, it has it in a very easy to use information format. I find it to be quite reliable, and in only two separate cases I knew more information than wiki, but never have I found it to be inaccurate in any way. And the two instances that I knew more than wiki, was when it was only a stump article, one being formed on some arcane knowledge.
I had a professor once at uni who kept on intentionally editing something wrong so that he could post a picture of it during his lectures warning students to not avoid wiki, but to do extra research in order to verify wiki's contents. As in to use wiki as a starting point for research as opposed to the be all and end all of your bibliography :3
Wikipedia is more accurate than almost anything else. It is constantly being updated and revised.
. . . by idiots
the reason why you cant use wikipedia as a reference is because its not a reliable source
lewis healey says who?
lewis healey It is a very reliable source. All information on Wikipedia is cited from other (you guessed it) reliable sources. It may not be the best thing to cite for say, a thesis, but it is still very reliable. Also, if you are really that concerned about your scholarly pursuits, I would capitalization.
well clearly you didnt understand the video, it is saying that information can be edited easily. you cant use the information on wiki in university for this reason so does it make it reliable? i think not. my friend once edited a page of craig gardner saying he played for his football team and scored a overhead kick of 40 yards which was utter rubbish so please go on about how wiki is so reliable.
I knew they're gonna make fun of the donation.....
Hmm. At 2:13 she disappears and at 2:26 she's back.
Could be an easter egg.
Glad Wikipedia got a lot more credibility these days
I hate when people say you should never cite Wikipedia and act like that's a reason why it's a bad website. That's like saying your blender a bad appliance because it's not very good at shredding your documents.
The founder himself has said Wikipedia, along with any encyclopedia, should never be used in your papers. It's just a source of knowledge for those wanted to casually brush up on something, collaberated by the public for the public.
The sick thing is, Wikipedia (as a rule) cites all its sources so Wikipedia’s citations are actually a _great_ thing to cite yourself
Now let's see an acting class taught by Mr. Wikiquote.
wikipedia is pretty nice. it is useful for rudimentary information about things that you don't know or for reaffirmation about things that you knew long time ago. for things that are complicated you can always go to google scholar or JSTOR for papers.
I use Wiki that way too! I'm always surprised by how complicated a lot of the pages are to follow, like the statistics and physics pages.
"No. you are not notable"
-John Green
Wasn't actually John Green (I think), but it did look an awful lot like him .
"I want to learn about cunnilingus."
Amir always comes up with something awesome in these sketches
0:46 - John Green?!
that is funnier than the video itself by 100 times
Ya beat me to it.
That's what I thought. I was looking through the comments to see if anyone else noticed.
Was that John Green?
No he's one of the original crews in CH, can't remember his name.
Jeff rubin. he works at buzzfeed now
Necropost! Anyway, yes it was, though Jeff Rubin was also in the video.
The Professor Britannica bit really got me. It's worth watching just for that one part.
Stephen H SO SAD. I've actually ran across a really quality article on the Britannica site that was better than the wikipedia one by far... then a popup blocked the screen and told me to subscribe and my friends I tried to share the article with got paywalled too
Nancy Ouyang Yeah it sucks.
That's what happens when you have Nobel prize winning physicists contributing to an encyclopedia as compared to the mechanic who changes the oil in your car...
I was once temporarily banned after arguing with an editor about a source, the position of a well known philosopher. The editor told me I had no idea what I was talking about and they know the material far better being a big hobby of theirs.
I still remember calling the said source on the phone, knowing him quite well having studied and worked with him for more than a decade. He basically laughed at me at first. Then when he heard about the distortion of his position, he actually explained it on Wikipedia. He too then got temporarily banned.
:O wow that is super dysfunctional and interesting from the engineering-crowdsourced-information-systems. Write it up on a blog? :)
Maxxx Flynnn ah... philosophy.
Well, if your philosopher had a non-Leftist position - then surely the SJWs that actually do run Wikipedia nowadays took issue with it.
Imagine this:
Economic reports from the World Bank -> unreliable source
Op eds from the New York Times -> reliable source
Welcome to Wikipedia. The shittiest blog on the internet. I mean... most blogs are shit - but at least blogs openly admit to being opinion rags, whilst Wikipedia insists that it isn't.
Stephen H Poor Professor Britannica! I'd take his class!!!! LOL!!!!!
Wikipedia is actually fairly accurate. It's statistical reliability has been documented many times. I can't remember the exact figures, but it was rated somewhere around 90+ percent in regards to it's accuracy.
Yousef Koroma yes
And 90% accuracy is a good thing? Who would want to base scientific or medical research on 90% accuracy?
Joshua Fiebig 90 "+" numbnuts. I fail to see your point. If you think ANY source of information has a 100% accuracy rating, you're more idiotic than you sound. Nothing within the scientific realm is infallible.
Yousef Koroma Originality. Get some.
Yousef Koroma "Oh yeah? Did you get that information from Wikipedia?" Isn't being captious?
Stop being so redundant.
Surprisingly I've found more errors in textbooks than on wikipedia.
Billy had two apples and lost one, calculate the mass of the sun
There should be a whole "Professor" series
Since when was Wikipedia this bad
Eh, about around the time when the video was made I was in middle school researching a president. The opening line went something like... "Fuck James Madison was the..."
I guess they moderate it more
Shadow The Light always
January 13 2001
in 2008, when the video was posted.
7 Years ago...Jesus
* 8.
*9
;3
Wikipedia is not a reliable source.
[Source: Wikipedia]
The sources listed at the bottom of the Wikipedia page can be useful, but Wikipedia itself is not considered a, 'reliable source'. Most teachers and certainly professors will not accept it as a credible bibliography source for a reason; it cannot be the only thing you use.Hilarious video as ever.
***** True, Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source in an academic paper. However, that does not mean the information is inaccurate. It's a fantastic resource for introductions into topics that you have no background in. Wikipedia is easily the most useful thing on the internet, barely surpassing porn.
bill withers Yes, you are correct in that it can be used as an introductory source and does include, as I said, fairly excellent articles and resources at the bottom of the page. 'Barely surpassing porn', that made my day. Thanks. :P
M. Valerie That might actually be the case, in that the Wiki site monitors will likely attempt to keep the pages free of false information. I wouldn't know for certain, but it's possible.
Kevin McElroy Not a single one of mine, nor any professor I have met at university, considers it a suitable source by itself, nor will they permit their students to cite it on a bibliography; it depends on the professor, as well as the education level. Some of my professors recommend the sources at the bottom of the website, but not the website alone, unless you're just trying to get a general starting idea of your paper/subject. :)
Kevin McElroy What does your professor teach?
I honestly can't resist
Corrections:
>The electrons aren't making bonds, the atoms are, electrons are the bond basically(or induced/electronegative attraction).
>Energy from nuclear reactions (assuming he's speaking of radioactivity) are gamma rays.
>Ryan Seacrest does indeed contain the elements arranged in molecules to undergo chemical reactions. (not a correction but you know :P)
2:10 IS OMG IT'S JOHN GREEN!
Jeff Rubin
Well to be honest Wikipedia was much more helpful to me when I was in school than the teachers lol...
*****
Whose aren,t?
0:45 IS THAT JOHN GREEN?
I WAS ABOUT TO ASK THAT!!!
No it's Jeff Rubin
This video was made when Wikipedia was 7 years old, just a third of its current age of 21, Wikipedia was in its relative infancy
I've never seen a wrong wikipedia page. Or at least an _obvously_ wrong wikipedia page.
Apparently Brittanica can't be bothered to use vector notation for Maxwell's equations.
There have been a number of studies on Wikipedia, and they have all shown it to be quite reliable. More so than Britannica. For example wikipedia is far more accurate and in depth on the Syrian civil war than any news paper. Sines Wikipedia is the first thing people will see about your field many experts make sure that their chosen fields wikipedia page is accurate.
Never cite anything from Wikipedia.
That's bullshit. Check the sources, yes; don't cite Wikipedia as the source, yes, but there's no reason to discredit information just because you found it on Wikipedia.
What I meant is don't cite from Wikipedia directly. Sorry for not being specific.
Jimster185 Sure, I can agree with that.
***** That is a practice heavily frowned upon in academic invironments. You either cite wikipedia or you site the sources on which the wikipedia page in question was based on, if and only if you used those sources (read them at least) as well.
Same general rule goes for citing sources from books, those sources should only be cited as sources if you used the source in question directly. Otherwise the book should be quoted.
Fenragon
I had the impression that was what he meant. I know I do the same thing - check what they're citing, do some cross checking. That in mind, Wikipedia is a *great* first stop on almost any subject you don't have a more specialized resource available for.
love the way the chalk board changes to what each person says without him actually writing anything (0:58-1:14)
Which was intentionally poking fun at how you can correct a wikipedia entry and it is automatically changed to what you said, whether or not it was actually correct.
Professor Brittanica is my boy.
haha this is funnier now that wikipedia is pretty damn reliable
Samus has X-ray vision? I was find that relevant to my "interests"
15 years later and this sketch is still great
When professor Brittanica arrives the 3rd equation on the blackboard is wrong. The second part of the equation (Faraday's law) needs a - sign
2:08, one of the make-up artists is "your mom" lol
[citation needed]
Aww I felt bad for Professor Britannica
Wikipedia is actually quite accurate, with moderators and people who check all the pages. You can't just go in and change it anymore.
Well it still is, just a lot stricter with content control.
I miss the old college humor people, there's only a few funny people and that's only because they are the older ones on the channel now, most of the people on there aren't funny and are just annoying and liberal....they're like this close to being BuzzFeed Video now, it's just depressing
+Ezra Lade
I feel the same way. Most of the videos aren't even about college or anything anymore. Kind of a misleading title honestly. I wonder what happened to the old cast.
+Altrunchen they moved on to better jobs for real shows that pay better money, and what not.
+Ezra Lade But but hug rooms and safe spaces and trigger warnings. Comon man :P
Fuck you and your safe space bitch!!!
TRIGGERING WARNING: THE ABOVE COMMENT WILL OFFEND YOUR SKANKY ASS!!!
FUCK YOU AND YOUR TRIGGERS!!! -TRIGGER WARNING. 😈rushthezeppelin
Remember guys this is 2008 when Wiki articles were rampid with troll accounts and corrections and it was very easy to change articles.
Funny thing about this, if you start rewriting things on Wiki without facts....mods shut you down in a flash. Especially on the articles that multiple people write on.
+Rhett Gedies This was back when Wikipedia was in it's infancy and had a bunch of problems.
0:46 Wait a minute is that John Green
+Kate Ronquillo yep
Nope. Jeff Rubin
Where?
the English captions are really accurate. The most accurate I have ever seen.
***** No, they're not.
cheesiscool335444 yeah denis they arent, there are some mistakes but hardly any
Gerge Buch approves
Where's Professor Dramatica?
CollageHumor should definitely make a video about that website. OMG
He'd probably be some drug addict that they brought in to substitute.
*****
"You better be quiet, or I'll show your dox to your classmates!"
The Britannica was a old book that people used to "Look it Up" back in the old days before Internet.
This was more accurate in 2008 before Wikipedia had a 24/7 editing staff, and it was much more of a "Communal Knowledge" type of site
False, Wikipedia provides sources. Dislike.
This was back in 2008, when Wikipedia's VSTF's and anti-vandalism efforts weren't yet widespread.
Lmao, this funny to me, because when I was in med school a couple of years ago, me and the older classmates went to the library to research certain things, whereas, the younger generation just read Wikipedia. My teacher one day said "I can tell which students went to the library and researched and can tell which students simply copied and pasted from Wikipedia. Oh, and by the way, that copy and paste information is wrong."
Greenville Belle I didn't see you in med school
Two things:
1) this is my Living Environment teacher, and
2) I just came here to make myself feel better after reading terrifying facts on Wikipedia 😉
Not funny at all. Try harder next time?
Do you not understand how Wikipedia worked years ago??
Mitch A. years? still today it does work the same thing, anyone can write whatever he/she wants
they screen that stuff nowadays though. Not like back then where anything could be put on there!
I miss the old cast :(
crucial to know is that most things learned at school are, generally altered, subjective or even completely false facts. Education/medical/religious/governmental/military sectors are generally highly distorted, as all now could see since quite early but has come more to the foreground, recently.
the fuck are you on about, you may be taught incorrect facts but if so, they are generally not on the syllabus and it is the teachers fault. The other case is where you are taught simplified facts because it may be too difficult or time consuming to understand the intricacies of some topics (like electron energy shells in gcse chemistry being dramatically simplified but the calculations are still generally correct)
If all people would already know the essential and already known truth by some of the founders of the system as it exists today, the entire system, that has aimed to suck humanity dry for it's own profit would not exist. If people would know certain basic truths about who they really are and what they can do, they would not be dependent of anything outside of them- and in that you have the fundaments of slavery engineered with exactly that intent, on a global scale. Fortunately that is turning around because more external information is made public, such as that which I am telling you right now.
With the right information, anyone is perfectly able to fully provide in it's own needs without the help, indeed of any external things such as companies that create products and so on.
Teachers at school (in general) are only allowed to tell teach, from higher up what they are demanded to teach.
A good trick at school is to make you believe that you get to know all kind of useful things that are only useful to a certain point and to serve a specific purpose, but are completely irrelevant once you get to know a whole new level of information transcending absolutely all other so called 'important or relevant knowledge'.
Somebody can think "I'm super-intelligent and know it all" but if he doesn't know the nature of his being and what he can do- he yet has to learn the essentials- that really will make whatever knowledge he has truly relevant to his own being and to life-such as the fact that we are all, God also and that we have the full potential to manifest and create anything instantly, (objects, life-scenario's instantly), have access to an infinite amount of knowledge that is within us. We have the full capacity that God is in us that can be used, limitlessly, that is also what Jesus, amongst many many many other perhaps less known by the masses has come to shown- bringing us to one of the main reasons why we are here- 'to wake up' to who we really are. If you'd like to know more about the nature of God within,
The "kabbalistic tree of life" may be a good self-supportive start to realize what is known and used against you by keeping it hidden from you in all possible manners in this world, by people that wnat you for your money and energy, using other people in the system to make it all look legit, but is in fact a completely croocked scam. Those people that are behind it wrongfully call themselves the illuminati and have been around for ages, operating through the food industry, economy, politics, school system, mainstream religion (including mainstream christianity, military, certain multi-nationals. (including mc donalds- you might want to look for the real purpose of that company, just to name one example) to keep people in the delusion that 'this is it' when it comes to life- At some point, you then come to reailze that the world as it is portrayed to you is just like disneyland make-believe.
All media presentation, no matter the form is subject to scrutiny.
I find that Wikipedia is most reliable in references to pop culture, and scientific fact. In regards to political and religious subjects wikipedia is very unreliable.
Vsauce in a nutshell...
did you even watch the whole video?
No...
Actually, I made the comment before shit "got real". So I get your point. I'm just to lazy to remove it.
How is this like Vsauce?
Move you're eyes approximately 10 centimeters up.
You know you really became somebody when you get a Wikipedia article about you.
is anyone else here slightly pleased by the nod to Metroid in this video?
me