Wikipedia is destroying knowledge :-(

I thought of posting in GQ: "What were human populations over time, e.g. in 9500 BC? 4500 BC? Yes, I did try to Google, but Google leads to answers I believe to be wrong, e.g. the graph on this page. That graph shows human populations increasing only slowly from 9500 BC to 4500 BC! Quite wrong, IMO! Not only did the area of land under cultivation increase dramatically over those dates, but improved techniques (dairy, plowing, perhaps boating) improved productivity.

(Furthermore, that graph refers to that era as “Semi Nomadic” — a tag which in this context I daresay would be met with ridicule by professional anthropologists.)

But I’m Pitting Wikipedia, not the linked site. What gives? Essentially the same graph is what Wikipedia shows. (I didn’t try to figure out who borrowed from whom.)

Oftentimes these days, the first half-dozen Google hits on a question might have the exact same text, all copied from Wikipedia under its public domain rules. And often the info is WRONG, but the Wiki copying drowns out the scholar’s answer.

Show me what I’m doing wrong. What are the better population estimates and where can I find them? Can I tweak my search engine to ignore not only Wikipedia but sites that copy Wikis?

Wikipedia has this table of various estimates with references:

One of those references has population estimates barely changing for that period, one has it increasing 9-fold, one is in between. I’d start by reading those three papers, and looking at the reference list within the most recent paper for other relevant publications.

On the more general hyperbole of your thread title:
Wikipedia allowed me to find those academic references within about 60 seconds. It would otherwise have taken me far longer, since I’m not an expert in the field. How exactly do you conclude that it’s destroying knowledge?

Wikipedia used to state that Billy Ray Cyrus was a bedwetter. I know that because I put it there. :slight_smile: It used to be possible for any shmo :smiley: to type any damn thing there!

Does WolframAlpha give you better results?

Does Atlantic Records still suck?

Well, lets Red from Overly Sarcastic Productions teach you what you are doing wrong:

So hunting what are the sources for that, one can follow, for example, the cite in the graph, and it leads us to the image in the wikimedia commons and the cites for it:

Exactly right. I’ve published a lot of nonfiction, books, articles, educational publishing stuff, and I’ve never once cited Wikipedia but I’ve used it again and again. It’s not perfect, but then again, neither is the Encyclopedia Britannica.

Autocorrect is making people bad spellers, teens spend too much time on phones, and now this. What is with you people lately? Are you trying to get put in a home?

Better than sleeping in a subway station and sneaking under the turnstile in order to get somewhere else.

You say that like it’s a bad thing.

Bah! Back in the day, we’d memorize the whole gods-damned Iliad! And the Odyssey! I’m telling you, this “written language” thing is turning people’s brains into mush!

I’m sure epidemic disease, especially zoonotic diseases, and warfare also increased dramatically over that same period…