There are plenty of high quality sources, but I don’t work for free. If you want me to produce an encyclopedia using my professional expertise, I’m happy to do it, but it’s a massive undertaking that I expect to be compensated for.

Your doubts are irrelevant. Just spend some time fact checking random articles and you will quickly verify for yourself how many inaccuracies are allowed to remain uncorrected for years.

With all due respect, Wikipedia’s accuracy is incredibly variable. Some articles might be better than others, but a huge number of them (large enough to shatter confidence in the platform as a whole) contain factual errors and undisguised editorial biases.

I’m a doctor of classical philology and most of the articles on ancient languages, texts, history contain errors. I haven’t made a list of those articles because the lesson I took from the experience was simply never to use Wikipedia.

This, but for Wikipedia.

Edit: Ironically, the down votes are really driving home the point in the OP. When you aren’t an expert in a subject, you’re incapable of recognizing the flaws in someone’s discussion, whether it’s an LLM or Wikipedia. Just like the GPT bros defending the LLM’s inaccuracies because they lack the knowledge to recognize them, we’ve got Wiki bros defending Wikipedia’s inaccuracies because they lack the knowledge to recognize them. At the end of the day, neither one is a reliable source for information.

A gay agenda of peacocks

I guess I just think that there’s a marked difference between using collective nouns that already exist in a language and making up brand new ones whole cloth just for the sake of being clever.

Merriam-Webster writes that most terms of venery fell out of use in the 16th century, including a “murder” for crows. It goes on to say that some of the terms in The Book of Saint Albans were “rather fanciful”, explaining that the book extended collective nouns to people of specific professions, such as a “poverty” of pipers. It concludes that for lexicographers, many of these do not satisfy criteria for entry by being “used consistently in running prose” without meriting explanation. Some terms that were listed as commonly used were “herd”, “flock”, “school”, and “swarm”.

None of those are goofy terms though…

If you wanna be pedantic, Italian pasta is actually the knockoff of Chinese noodles.

Also, Greek food is fantastic!

Ironic…

Reddit loves violent content, provided it has a strongly homophobic, misogynistic, theistic, or otherwise conservative element. If course, if you make the mistake of reporting violent content, then it’s up to the individual moderators of the sub posting that content to decide whether the content is actually violent (according to their own standards), or whether you’re actually just “harassing” them by reporting it.

Funny enough, I just made this account after getting banned from reddit for reporting violent content. Apparently it constituted “abuse of the report button”, go figure.