Wow I just saw tonight s news article on Wikipedia that played on FOX News Earlier I d posted here the AP article on Wikipedia from Dec 12 2005 In what has become a huge coincidence the very day the media begins reporting on the dangers of Wikipedia happens to be the day immediately after the very week I discovered misinformation and falsehoods being posted on this page about nitrites and then tried to edit them by attempting to add more accurate information but then was attacked and harassed by another person who disagrees with my edits and was ultimately blocked and threatened by a purported Wikipedia administrator As was reported in the news today people can go to to learn more about how Wikipedia functions and where the dangers exist The folks at wikipediawatch report that what s happening in Wikipedia is that any collection of citations that may APPEAR balanced is all that anybody expects If the title or snippet in a link itself contributes to this impression then the full text is not researched by anyone This is exactly what has been going on in this nitrite page As a result it truly is as wikipediawatch reminds us garbage in garbage out garbage back in and after a few cycles of this it all turns into a big stinking heap Truly as the news media warned today Don t believe eveyrthing you read on the Web especially on Wikipedia The following two posts found in a wikipediareview blog sum up my experiences this past week after having been harassed threatened and finally blocked after I attempted to add to the body of knowledge about nitrites poppers They demonstrate how dangerous Wikipedia based on its current model really is Wikipedia s procedural faults complete anarchy as regards contributions and sometimes bizzare social rules do not teach people to become good researchers or writers it teaches them how to be good Wikipedians or to get the hell out Jason Scott when it comes to history and politics Wikipedia can claim whatever it wants by shutting out those who actually know something about a certain topic In that way Wikipedia can rewrite history as it sees fit which may have nothing to do with reality or the actual facts SummerFR Finally this post on a board discussing wikipedia really sets it out well Any moron can pretty well say anything they want on any topic which is fine for a News Group or a Forum but not an Encyclopedia In my opinion a reference source should be authoritative enough to end arguments not start them I believe that Wikipedia could better serve the internet community if they checked their facts first before publishing the article Instead we have a situation where the cart is placed before the horse and we end up with what is left by the horse Nuf said