Mazty said:
No it's evidence that work has used wikipedia in a reference ergo your claim that wikipedia cannot be referenced must be re-evaluated. Also you apply this limitation, one that only applies to writing papers in some academic establishments, but no others. In otherwords, you're just being lazy and/or pedantic. |
Autism and Genius have a strong correlation. Surprised you don't know this...well, in time.
It is anecdotal fallacy:
"Using a personal experience or an isolated example instead of a valid argument especially to dismiss statistics"
Can't read the OP?
1 Book out of millions doesn't show anything. lmfao.
The difference between wiki and you dumping several sources is, those sources aren't open for modification by anyone other than the author(s) of the source. It's really getting tedious to attempt to convey this difference to you. Perhaps we should address this after you graduate high school?
