but wiki isn't a credible source to some people

really very trustworthy, but it can be entertaining.

I find it, in general, to be reliable as far has history goes. It matches what I read in history books and encyclopedias, and even other sites. Hell, of you don't believe it, just follow the cites at the bottom of the page.

as for current info, say on a law or something similar, it's good, for celebrities, above tabloid reporting sometimes.

Can't I have SOME fun?

start an internet rumour about who it is, I bet you'll eventually find out. Via Snopes.

Just kidding btw. And believe or not, conservapedia actually got this one correct.

I tend to go to Snopes for debunking RW rumors and urban legends (especially RW urban legends). They're pretty good for what they do.

At least according to this chain email I received, which I have no reason to doubt.

Its obvious.

Those evil guys at Snopes, I bet they've been using reason and facts again!

dogey doge?