Funny. In my day Wikipedia just came out and they used to give the same advice. In comparison, I would wager any random wiki article has a better chance of being more reliable and a better answer to your question than a Google summary.
Eh, there are entire categories of questions that can’t and shouldn’t be answered by searching wikipedia. A technical howto, for example, doesn’t belong on wikipedia because wikipedia articles are listings of facts, not narratives about following a process. They just aren’t meant for, or structured for, that type of question.
Stackoverflow also leaves a lot to be desired in that area, though, so you still need a search engine to find them.
Funny. In my day Wikipedia just came out and they used to give the same advice. In comparison, I would wager any random wiki article has a better chance of being more reliable and a better answer to your question than a Google summary.
Eh, there are entire categories of questions that can’t and shouldn’t be answered by searching wikipedia. A technical howto, for example, doesn’t belong on wikipedia because wikipedia articles are listings of facts, not narratives about following a process. They just aren’t meant for, or structured for, that type of question.
Stackoverflow also leaves a lot to be desired in that area, though, so you still need a search engine to find them.
Thats why they made wikihow