I wonder if this writer even read her sources. She says, triumphantly: “ In fact, when experts compare Wikipedia, page by page, to conventional encyclopedias, Wikipedia wins. That’s according to The Guardian’s 2005 article, “Can you trust Wikipedia?””

When you go to that Guardian article, it says of Wikipedia:

“the way it is written lacks clarity and doesn’t necessarily inspire confidence”

“Broadly speaking, it’s inaccurate and unclear.”

“every value judgment it makes is wrong”

“Three things bothered me about the entry”

“It’s not terrible… Overall mark: 6/10”

“there are a few small inaccuracies”

“More important are the omissions”

“some of the writing might piss people off”

“leaves one with the impression that it was written by someone who had no previous knowledge of the subject”

So, a hearty thank you to Ms. Ellen Rhymes, for showing us EXACTLY what sort of person thinks that Wikipedia is a “real source”. A dimwit.