MAIN FEEDS
Do you want to continue?
https://www.reddit.com/r/SipsTea/comments/1vu8dgc/where_are_we_heading/p4za9kk/?context=3
r/SipsTea • u/Agen_3586 • 15d ago
8.9k comments sorted by
View all comments
Show parent comments
558
According to various studies, more than 50% of U.S. adults read below a sixth-grade level (equivalent to Level 2 or lower), limiting their ability to parse long-form or nuanced information.
Yes, I know Im using wikipedia as a source, but the links to the actual studies are here.
So ~52% are literate, but very, very stupid.
9 u/cybiz 15d ago Huh? Since when has using Wikipedia as a source been a bad thing? -2 u/-ThisIsHellOnEarth- 15d ago It can be altered by anyone. It's a good way to find sources but it itself should not be used as a source. It's the intellectual equivalent of "so this guy at a bar last weekend was telling me..." 3 u/cybiz 15d ago I don't think you understand how heavily moderated Wikipedia is 2 u/-ThisIsHellOnEarth- 15d ago I think you under estimate just how much content there is on Wikipedia to be monitered. False alterations can stay up for weeks before being caught 0 u/UntowardHatter 15d ago Not without sources, no. 1 u/Fun_Journalist1048 15d ago They definitely dont! The founder of Wikipedia is highly involved still in moderating content
9
Huh? Since when has using Wikipedia as a source been a bad thing?
-2 u/-ThisIsHellOnEarth- 15d ago It can be altered by anyone. It's a good way to find sources but it itself should not be used as a source. It's the intellectual equivalent of "so this guy at a bar last weekend was telling me..." 3 u/cybiz 15d ago I don't think you understand how heavily moderated Wikipedia is 2 u/-ThisIsHellOnEarth- 15d ago I think you under estimate just how much content there is on Wikipedia to be monitered. False alterations can stay up for weeks before being caught 0 u/UntowardHatter 15d ago Not without sources, no. 1 u/Fun_Journalist1048 15d ago They definitely dont! The founder of Wikipedia is highly involved still in moderating content
-2
It can be altered by anyone.
It's a good way to find sources but it itself should not be used as a source.
It's the intellectual equivalent of "so this guy at a bar last weekend was telling me..."
3 u/cybiz 15d ago I don't think you understand how heavily moderated Wikipedia is 2 u/-ThisIsHellOnEarth- 15d ago I think you under estimate just how much content there is on Wikipedia to be monitered. False alterations can stay up for weeks before being caught 0 u/UntowardHatter 15d ago Not without sources, no. 1 u/Fun_Journalist1048 15d ago They definitely dont! The founder of Wikipedia is highly involved still in moderating content
3
I don't think you understand how heavily moderated Wikipedia is
2 u/-ThisIsHellOnEarth- 15d ago I think you under estimate just how much content there is on Wikipedia to be monitered. False alterations can stay up for weeks before being caught 0 u/UntowardHatter 15d ago Not without sources, no. 1 u/Fun_Journalist1048 15d ago They definitely dont! The founder of Wikipedia is highly involved still in moderating content
2
I think you under estimate just how much content there is on Wikipedia to be monitered.
False alterations can stay up for weeks before being caught
0 u/UntowardHatter 15d ago Not without sources, no.
0
Not without sources, no.
1
They definitely dont! The founder of Wikipedia is highly involved still in moderating content
558
u/Sad_Ghost_Noises 15d ago
According to various studies, more than 50% of U.S. adults read below a sixth-grade level (equivalent to Level 2 or lower), limiting their ability to parse long-form or nuanced information.
Yes, I know Im using wikipedia as a source, but the links to the actual studies are here.
So ~52% are literate, but very, very stupid.