19:
by hundreds of volunteers, yet very few of these volunteers have the experience and knowledge of a professional writer/editor. A cultural bias has seemed to have washed over many entries on the site, as general consensus replaces cold, hard facts. There is also a matter of vandalism, which the site is susceptible to. These problems, coupled with the almost obsessive behavior of many of the volunteers (try placing an external link on the site without having it removed), have led people to other sources for information.
18:
Touting itself as “the 💕 that anyone can edit”, it’s no wonder that
Knowledge has garnered so much bad press lately. After all, it is hard to imagine that millions of anonymous users could accurately maintain a factual and unbiased living encyclopedia. Knowledge is a non-profit site that is policed
26:
Knowledge is an extremely useful "user-generated reference service". It is not, however, an encyclopedia and by definition it will never become one.
8:
13:
14:
36:
1:
7:
10:
41:
32:
40:
39:
35:
34:
33:
31:
30:
29:
12:
11:
5:
38:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
37:
28:
27:
22:
20:
25:
23:
17:
15:
21:"
24:"
16:"
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.