Should I read actual history books or is Wikipedia+YouTube enough?

[gizmo J]

I get 99% of my history knowledge from Wikipedia and YouTube, such as:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Europe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Middle_East
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Asia

and YouTube channels such as CrashCourse and also watching random biographies about notable people.

I'm now wondering if I should read actual History books because today I was swimming in a pool at USC university and I was talking to a student there who is also a lifeguard, we were talking ww2 (because its the 70th anniversary of the Hiroshima bombings) and we had some disagreements about certain events and he asked me 'where did you get this information from' and I told him 'Wikipedia and YouTube', he laughed at me and said Wikipedia and YouTube are not real history lessons and that he was a History Major therefore he knew better then me.

So is their History books I should read or Is this guy just a tool?

 

[Slobodan]

I edited a wikipedia page years ago and listed myself as a notable historical figure from some town in Europe, it's still there lol

 

[fluffball]

Fun fact: Text book prices have increased more than 1000% (one thousand) since 1970.

Read the internet, but make sure you fact check shit by reading multiple sources. Wikipedia is often wrong.

 

[Sycho Sid]

I edited a wikipedia page years ago and listed myself as a notable historical figure from some town in Europe, it's still there lol

They are afraid to get Nic Cage'd if they change it.

Also TS, the guy is probably a tool.

But you should definitely check sources and such. Especially for things like Wikipedia and Youtube, but really for anything if you want to be as certain as possible.

 

[zackryder]

step up yo game TS

 

[ehtheist]

I put my name in Wikipedia articles all the time. Is this the history you want? Is this the history you deserve? I think it is. Do you?

 

[SuperLuigi]

For basic summary wiki is fine as long as you check the sources at the bottom. If you want to know the latest and greatest scholars discussing things in depth I recommend paying a fee to have access to an online database of articles.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

If you want to know history, you need to read history. Noting against wiki though. I use wiki all the time for a basic outline. Sometimes they can lead you to great resources as well.

 

[gspieler]

Just need info: Wiki

Want to be a history buff: read books

Last resort/too lazy to read: YT

Also, lol at the lifeguard appealing to his own authority, as an undergrad history major. He must not have taken Intro to Logic yet.

 

[Irenaeus]

Use both. If you study proper history enough, you're more qualified to assess the quality of information on the internet, and it becomes a better source for casual knowledge.

If you've only used wiki and youtube, your knowledge about subjects will tend to be superficial, and lack quality control. They can be good tools, but you need more than that.

 

[Bobby Boulders]

Misinformation is everywhere.

 

[Bobby Boulders]

I edited a wikipedia page years ago and listed myself as a notable historical figure from some town in Europe, it's still there lol

My *****.

 

[Madmick]

Your OP is probably giving Zankou cancer.

 

[Limbo Pete]

Books.
Read books.
People are still somewhat liable for what they print.

 

[Reyesnuthugr]

Youtube is not reliable at all. It is just a good place to get some interesting leads that may or may not be true/accurate. It is often misleading or flat out wrong.

Wikipedia is nowhere as comprehensive as you think.

Hmm. You strike me as the kind of person who doesn't enjoy actually thinking.


The good news is there's plenty of people like you. The bad news is that they all hate and climb all over each other.


If you only care about superficial, general assumptions on things and don't mind being mislead, misleading others, and not having functional knowledge, then yes-- you're on the right track!

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

Youtube is not reliable at all. It is just a good place to get some interesting leads that may or may not be true/accurate. It is often misleading or flat out wrong.

Wikipedia is nowhere as comprehensive as you think.

Hmm. You strike me as the kind of person who doesn't enjoy actually thinking.


The good news is there's plenty of people like you. The bad news is that they all hate and climb all over each other.


If you only care about superficial, general assumptions on things and don't mind being mislead, misleading others, and not having functional knowledge, then yes-- you're on the right track!

That's a bit harsh.

I am also all about books, but if we take the example of the ancient Mediterranean, why do you assume that one can learn better from Herodotus than from a quality report on youtube ?

 

[Doughbelly]

Stop! Gizmo J trolling time!

 

[Bebop]

waiting to see a picture of ts with a tinfoil hat in 3 days after all the internets he reads/watches

 

[Michaelangelo]

That's the best way to get 3 degrees

 

[Luger]

Depends if you want to go balls deep into it or just flirt with the subject.