User:Andries Krugers Dagneaux: Difference between revisions
imported>Andries Krugers Dagneaux (I admit that recognizing good sources is often difficult and differs per subject and per claim, but if you do not have clue then please do not edit here (or in Wikipedia).) |
imported>Andries Krugers Dagneaux (Larry Sanger's balanced essay about Wikipedia.) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
I am really tired of Wikipedia where some contributors do not have a beginning of understanding how to recognize reputable sources on a certain subject. Of course, I admit that recognizing good sources is often difficult and differs per subject and per claim, but if you do not have clue then please do not edit here (or in Wikipedia). | I am really tired of Wikipedia where some contributors do not have a beginning of understanding how to recognize reputable sources on a certain subject. Of course, I admit that recognizing good sources is often difficult and differs per subject and per claim, but if you do not have clue then please do not edit here (or in Wikipedia). | ||
I recommend [[Larry Sanger]]'s balanced essay about Wikipedia as food for thought.[http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/12/30/142458/25] | |||
[[Category:CZ Authors|Krugers Dagneaux, Andries]] | [[Category:CZ Authors|Krugers Dagneaux, Andries]] | ||
[[Category:Engineering Authors|Krugers Dagneaux, Andries]] | [[Category:Engineering Authors|Krugers Dagneaux, Andries]] | ||
Revision as of 13:03, 27 May 2007
First name:Andries
Surname: Krugers Dagneaux
Born in the Netherlands in 1968, Completed education in electronics at the Higer Technical School in Enschede. Follower of Sathya Sai Baba for 9 years, affiliated with the website of Dutch former concerned followers http://www.exbaba.com Speaks English, Dutch, German. Understands French. Professionally involved in computer hardware. Interested in cults, Hinduism, and epistemology. Avid but not the most accurate reader; has made mistakes in the past when relying too much on memory instead of re-reading what the sources state.
I am really tired of Wikipedia where some contributors do not have a beginning of understanding how to recognize reputable sources on a certain subject. Of course, I admit that recognizing good sources is often difficult and differs per subject and per claim, but if you do not have clue then please do not edit here (or in Wikipedia).
I recommend Larry Sanger's balanced essay about Wikipedia as food for thought.[1]