There's a huge difference between "consulted Wikipedia on any matter in their professional arena" and "relied exclusively on Wikipedia for a medical matter about a patient's treatment".
A doctor might well use it as a regular place (one of several) to double check something, especially obscure areas, or when writing a professional letter (eg to a professional magazine or colleague) FT2 On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Fred Bauder <fredb...@fairpoint.net> > wrote: > > "Across all markets a surprising 75% of doctors in the 51-60 age groups > > stated that they regularly used Wikipedia for professional use." > > > > http://www.responsesource.com/releases/rel_display.php?relid=65076 > > > > They edit a lot too. > > > > It is unlikely that any doctor while under oath in discovery or > > testifying at a trial would admit that they consulted Wikipedia regarding > > any matter, especially regarding any erroneous information they may have > > relied on. > > > > Fred > > > > > > Pretty bold statement - 75% of doctors in that age group would commit > perjury by lying rather than admit to having read Wikipedia? > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
