Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: ~Serenading with sensous soliloquies whilst singing supple sentences that are simultaneously suppling my sonnets with serenity serendipitously.~ -Serendipper
Bikes: Guerciotti Pista-Giant Carbon-Bridgestone300- Batavus Type Champion Road Bike, Specialized Hardrock Commuter, On-One The Gimp (SS Rigid MTB/hit by a truck)- Raleigh Sports 3-speed,Gatsby Scorcher, comming soon...The Penny Farthing Highwheel!
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Originally Posted by FrankBattle
Exactly. So, why is an Oxford-revised account any less .. romantic(ized) than a Wikipedial(ized) one.
I'm just saying ..
History is too about adjusting your filters, no? Or is it about indoctrinating others' filters as gospel.
I find the Oxford texts to contain the least amount of biases in the english language as far as historical documents are concerned.
Wikipedia suffers from less cohesive editing, too little cross-referenced research, and a lack of core standards.
entertaining for pop culture references, but I wouldn't use it for serious research. That's why god made libraries. And Eboo.