it is actually quite comprehensive and correct [if not over the top] for science topics. =)
my teachers support it =P
It can be good, however I think students need to move beyond google and wikipedia. My teachers will not accept it as a point of reference. I went on a page and found that someone had written a whole lot of crap on adhesive capsulitis which had been there for MONTHS, and it sounded really credible too.
Besides, my aim was to provide websites which many students wouldn't have heard of which are very useful. Most people know of wikipedia, so it would be a little pointless lol.
sure, but wikipedia shouldnt be invalidated because some of it is not "completely" true
for popular topics [in the major disciplines, especially for math/science things], wikipedia articles have been rigorously edited and re-edited, and can be trusted to give you a lot of what you need.
whilst other options should be explored, it seems ridiculous that the greatest resources central to this time, Google and Wikipedia, are discouraged by a school.
Britannica and print publications are things of the past
