Ask Lemmy

27156 readers

1627 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]

Rules: (interactive)

1) Be nice and; have fun

Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them

2) All posts must end with a '?'

This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?

3) No spam

Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.

4) NSFW is okay, within reason

Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].

5) This is not a support community.

It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.

Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Is it possible to have Wikipedia sources in a cycle? (self.asklemmy)

submitted 1 year ago by inspxtr to c/asklemmy

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I’m not very familiar with how Wikipedia vets the sources in the references/external links. I was wondering whether there are manual or automated checks for cyclic sources, for example a Wikipedia page cites a source for something, but such source after a few rounds of citing would go back to the same Wikipedia page.

Does that happen with Wikipedia?
Does it matter? I presume that would invalidate the source?
How do they make sure it does not happen? Is there an automated check or something?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

From my experience, despite all the citogenesis described in other comments here, Wikipedia citations are still better vetted than in many, many scientific papers, let alone regular journalism :/ I recall spending days following citation links in already well-cited papers to basically debunk basic statements in the field.

[–] inspxtr 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can you give an example if you remember for the last point you made?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I do not have notes from that time anymore, sorry. I do recall though that after following a chain of citations I ended up at the paper in the center of this controversy. Nobody sane would cite in now except to point out its flaws, but if there's a modern paper that cites a 10 year old paper that cites a 30 year old paper that cites it—people usually won't notice.