No title available
Discoholic 🪩
Sade Olutola
Game of Thrones Daily
official daine visual archive
No title available
Aqua Utopia｜海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
d e v o n
Mike Driver
Monterey Bay Aquarium
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
Interview Vampire Daily
almost home
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
art blog(derogatory)
tannertan36
Game Changer & Make Some Noise
Cosimo Galluzzi
Jar Jar Binks Fan Club
shark vs the universe
seen from Australia
seen from Germany
seen from Palestinian Territories
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Tunisia
seen from Syria
seen from France
seen from Belgium
seen from Czechia
seen from Azerbaijan
seen from Türkiye
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from Australia
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
@procastination-maximisation
My D&D game tonight
So we were facing a bandit camp and we killed them all and our DM made us to a perception check. We found out that 4 of the 5 were not exactly human.
DM: you see that only one is actually bleeding.
Half-Orc barbarian: I investigate the corpses
DM: you see that they’re just skeletons with human skin.
Me eating a Reese’s cup: aren’t we all?
Party and DM: [silence]
DM: fuck Ella stop bring your shit into this it’s a role playing game.
I hope Wikipedia doesnt go bankrupt it will feel like the end times . I think I will literally panic
Encyclopedia Britannica is always there
there’s this place called a library. and they have these things called books. and then there’s this thing called Google Search. where you can find books in PDF form.
Wikipedia is user edited. you can literally put anything you want in an entry almost. I think you know where I’m about to go with this.
You’re condescending and annoying. I am attached to Wikipedia out of sentimentality it’s always been there for as long as I remember and reliable to me for some casual trivia. Wikipedia is iconic and I love her. go write a research paper or something
who let high school teachers find tumblr
me: hm i wonder how many countries drive on the same side as the UK
friend: let’s check wikipedia in 2 seconds on our phones
some asshole on tumblr: um excuse me why don’t you stop what you’re doing to go to the library and look it up in an outdated book that’s edited maybe twice a decade and that definitely doesn’t have a single page article called “list of countries with left-hand traffic”
also “user edited” really doesn’t mean as much as you think it does. there are millions of people displaying accurate information, for every one person displaying inaccurate information. and that inaccurate information is usually changed quickly, and the person who made it can get their ip blocked from wikipedia if it was bad enough. way more accurate than textbooks or a library.
Librarian here! I’ve worked at both academic (college/university) and public libraries, and let me tell you this: most print encyclopedias are useless garbage we can’t get rid of fast enough. With the exception of subject-specific sets which we need to buy again every few years because the information has become outdated, most of the information in any volume of an encyclopedia is far more accessible and far more in-depth on the internet.
Wikipedia as a reference resource is fantastic because, just like print encyclopedias, it serves as a jumping-off point for research… and so do librarians! A librarian isn’t going to just write your paper for you, we’re going to point you to the books, articles, and websites that contain the information. Wikipedia is great for that, too, because any article that gets more than a bit of traffic will wind up with sources and external links. But print encyclopedias don’t go that far in citing their sources, and because they’re static media, the references may not only be outdated, they might be entirely inaccessible due to age, obscurity, or cost of access.
And there’s an interesting thing about all those books we have on the shelves… anyone can write one, and usually they only have a handful of other people checking their work. Academic journals are somewhat notorious for the ease with which a completely falsified paper can see publication (especially in cases of electronic journals), but printed books can also be easily falsified, whether as a result of publishers with an agenda or just fact-checkers slacking off.
As has been pointed out above, wikipedia is really great at getting obscenely specific in terms of the topics of articles. It’s an amazing collection of data, and more importantly, it’s an amazing collection of sources of data.
The role of a reference librarian and a wikipedia editor are basically the same: show you a brief summary of the information you need, and point you to more in-depth, reliable sources.
I was helping a friend clear out their dad’s old stuff from their home recently and we came across encyclopedias from the 90s.
They all went to the dump. They were ASTOUNDINGLY outdated. Totally fucking useless.
High school English teacher here–I regularly get crap from some of my colleagues, but I am completely fine with students using Wikipedia for info. Wikipedia does an excellent job of flagging articles that have been recently edited until someone can verify the changes, so pages with inaccurate info often have giant warnings at the top saying “THIS PAGE MAY CONTAIN IANCCURATE INFO”. Won’t find that in an out-of-date print edition.
Not only that, but Wikipedia cites its sources. It tells you right at the bottom of the page where all its info came from, so if you want to use a fact from Wikipedia but don’t want a teacher annoyed with you, just cite the source in the footnote. Teachers and professors are (a) not likely to check up on this and (b) it’s a real source so even if they do it’s legit?
The biggest problem I have had with letting students use Wikipedia is actually that Wikipedia articles are often written in such academic language that students sometimes struggle to understand them. That part kids have to overcome on their own or with the help of their teacher. But there’s nothing wrong with Wikipedia as a source. Hatred for it is a remnant of academic elitism, thinking that “peer-reviewed” can only mean some handful of crusty white dudes instead of literally anyone with enough knowledge and motivation to review it.
Honestly. My dad is a college professor and he’s told me time and again to always start my research at Wikipedia. You have to go further, obviously, but its such a great jumping off point for information.
Plus, where else can I find an itemized and updated list of every Cryptid known to human kind?
For the impenetrable articles, here’s my tip.
The list of other languages in the sidebar? Look at it and check whether the article has a version in Simple English.
Simple English is a mode for non-native English speakers but is also great if your reading comprehension is not super good, you’re having a slow brain day for any mental health or developmental disorder reason, or the English version is just poorly written.
Librarian here, and this whole post gives me so much joy.
@sugargroupie, @turtletotem
I feel like people think “not a reliable source” means “not true” but it actually means “can’t be quoted because the words might change”
with all of these movie reboots i would like to pitch a mean girls reboot staring Chris Evans, Chris Pine, Chis Hemsworth, and Chris Pratt
Where obviously Chris Evans is Cady, Chris Pine is Regina, Chris Hemsworth is Gretchen and Christ Pratt is Karen
unemployment rates are down though so it’s a win if you think about it
goatsmoochies
unmute this please
too perfect
“I didn’t say anything”
Someone get her outta here lol
Can we talk about this segment for a moment?
This was such a beautiful moment for me, because it showed a genuine discussion. Yes he made jokes (as is his job), but he also made a genuine effort to try and understand her position. He is unashamedly left wing (by US standards) but took the time to engage in a reasoned discussion to try and understand a completely different perspective.
This is what politics needs, not an obsession with balance (or whatever the trendy term for a shallow attempt to obscure bias), not dogmatic pundits shouting over each other. But a genuine discussion and attempt to understand the other side.
Self-assessment
I would probably have gotten more out of this class if I had done the reading.
i think we’ve all been there
how to not work on the weekend: 1. define work and weekend as restrictive social constructs 2. feel sad
via: The New Yorker Cartoons
Working in Government
I worry that my job is stripping me of empathy. I spend every day looking at data (which makes it hard to keep sight of the individuals behind it), and feigning sympathy for members of the public. To a certain point this is a necessary coping mechanism to do my job. But I fear that my cynicism may strip me of the identity I aim for.
No. (via Zedtown)
I get it now. I get it. The things that you hope for the most are the things that destroy you in the end.
John Green, Will Grayson, Will Grayson (via wordsnquotes)
I’m tricking my students into writing a research paper by having them write an open letter and then strengthen their argument by adding evidence. They were allowed to write about anything they wanted for the first draft of their open letter, and one of my 10th grade boys decided he wanted to write about girls who only like bands because the members are cute and don’t really care about the music.
I let him do it because I’ve found that shutting down a student’s idea at the first draft stage tends to make them more obstinate about the topic. I figured we’d get to the evidence-gathering stage, he wouldn’t be able to find scholarly sources and he would change his topic.
Well lo and behold, today he comes into class and tells me he’s changing his topic. Apparently, he couldn’t find any evidence and he figured he was being kind of hypocritical because he gets really excited about athletes he doesn’t even know and the only reason that’s different than fangirls is because it’s him. He actually told me that he realized that writing that first letter would be pretty condescending. He’s going to write about LGBT rights instead.
This next generation, y’all. There’s some good stuff happening.
EXCELLENT TEACHING METHOD A++++
20 Cognitive Biases That Screw Up Your Decisions
Remember that everyone, including you and me, suffers from these biases. If you find that you’re trying to convince yourself that you’re special, that somehow these biases don’t apply to you, then you’re only intensifying their influence. Here are a few choice biases that are hidden around every corner:
Availability Heuristic: People overestimate the importance of information that is available to them. A person might argue that smoking is not unhealthy because they know someone who lived to 100 and smoked three packs a day.
Bandwagon Effect: The probability of one person adopting a belief increases based on the number of people who hold that belief. This is a powerful form of groupthink.
Choice-supportive Bias: When you choose something, you tend to feel positive about it, even that choice has flaws. Like how you think your dog is awesome–even if it bites people once in a while.
Clustering Illusion: This is the tendency to see patterns in random events. It is key to various gambling fallacies, like the idea that red is more or less likely to turn up on a roulette table after a string of reds.
Confirmation Bias: We tend to listen only to information that confirms our preconceptions–one of the many reason it’s so hard to have an intelligent conversation about climate change.
Selective Perception: Allowing our expectations to influence how we perceive the world. An experiment involving a football game between students from two universities shows that one team saw the opposing team commit more infractions.
Stereotyping: Expecting a group or person to have certain qualities without having real information about the person. It allows us to quickly identify strangers as friends or enemies, but people tend to overuse and abuse it.
gekkan shoujo nozaki-kun is a treasure,
if i don’t reblog this assume im dead
I have never identified with a video more in my entire life
Still relevant to the video.
This is amazing
HONESTLY YOU HAVE TO WATCH THIS OMG
Favourite episode by far
This series was too goddamn perfect
B4 u say that you don’t want that same-sex pair on tv to be a couple because platonic relationships are underrepresented
I want you to hear me out on an idea SO outrageous that it might just work
A character
Could be in a romantic/sexual relationship with a character of the same sex
AND
Be in a platonic relationship with a DIFFERENT character, also of the same sex!
GAY PEOPLE WITH FRIENDS: THE RADICAL PLAN
WOAH SLOW DOWN THERE MCPROGRESSIVEPANTS
utterly ridiculous, everyone knows that people can’t be friends with people of the gender they’re attracted to. That’s why as a pansexual I have no friends at all
