Is Wikipedia a reliable source to learn about history?

>>2826535
yes

Yes[4][5]

It's a decent place to start, but once you find things that interest you then you should go to a library and start reading books on it.

might as well most sources even though credible will probably be attacked anyway due to "muh bias" and "muh elitism"

wonder why /his/ doesn't make it's own site on the summery of history of this or that country?

>>2826580
We should do this.

>>2826580
the people who make edits to the articles on wikipedia that don't get deleted in five minutes probably know more about history than the average /his/-fag

no, read the Talk section on any controversial historical page and see the dumbasses that edit stuff. I once found a literal wewuzzer with an ankh profile picture and everything who did nothing but edit pages concerning black history.

>>2826535
On a superficial level, yes. After a while it becomes easy to just take parts of an article and disregard the "and then there was a battle and it was awesome"-tier shit that some people add to the pages.

>>2826580
Because it would be like 1d4chan but not funny.

>>2826580
That's just the countryball wiki

>>2826601
I don't know, I like the transparency seeing editing histories, and there are always [Citation needed] everywhere in those types of articles.

>>2826535
It's a good starting off point.

>>2826535
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamergate_controversy
judge for yourself

if you are american yes

>>2826535
Go on wikipedia, read a bit on subject, find books about it.
Wikipedia is like that one time your dad let you drive his car in a parking lot on a sunday afteroon, it won't teach you how to drive but it's still something

It can give you the basic facts, but history tends to have a lot of different perspectives on a single issue, and then you start verging into historiography.

depends on the article writers it attracts, with the more obscure facts and niche areas it can give you a quick rundown, with pophis it will be full of memes, if you go into the edit section you will find some meme being changing only for it to be changed back a second later by a neurotic nerd with an obsession with it who whines and bitches to the mods to get the article locked and anyone who disagrees banned

>>2826580
>wonder why /his/ doesn't make it's own site on the summery of history of this or that country?
Because bibliographies exist

>>2827472
Somehow I feel I'd be a tad more autistic just by reading about that shit. That was the most pathetic shitstorm in internet history.

No.

https://www.britannica.com/

>>2826562
I concur

>>2826535

It's pretty basic but decent, yes. Obviously you should go and read some books if you want to properly know about a subject.

>>2826580

It would be shit, the average /his/ poster knows virtually nothing while thinking they know far more than they actually do.

>>2826580
It would be horrible, uninformed, ideologically-driven opining mixed with pointless memes and cringe-inducing attempts at humour.

>>2827555
>Because bibliographies exist
By your logic, why are you here then? After all, as you say, bibliographies exist.