If you've ever read about a movie on wikipedia you will see there is always info about the 'principal photography' ( which simply means 'filming' ). Why do they use this expression? - No one in the whole world calls it that - not even people in the movie industry! I cannot see any benefit whatsoever.
I don't know why exactly, I find Wikipedia pretty useless most of the time except when looking for statistics. It's like they intentionally are trying to make it look 'sophisticated' and piss you off because they don't give you the info right of the bat in an easy way. Probably they overshot it, and their main goal is to make the information as accurate and precise as possible. So then what you get are these arguments about what it is 'actually named' between a bunch of nerds and one is more nerdy than the other. Like I said Wikipedia has overshot it and I feel there are many websites out there that explain things in a more normal way. And then you got Google.. of course, Wikipedia often continues to rank 1st, because we are used to clicking the first result. Then, you start reading the info because you're trying to understand what the hell it is they're talking about. Then, Google thinks Wikipedia gets a good visiting time, thinks Wikipedia is useful for us, and the circle is complete.
Question? Do you work in the film industry? And you can hate but ya this is Wiki baby: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal_photography Seems like a legit term to me.
Wikipedia is okay as long as the page lists credible sources. Having said that when people cite it to prove their point in an article or forum posts I roll my eyes. I think someone could do better than point to a Wikpedia page. Personally I would never reference it here on this forum or in a blog post. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/may/13/should-university-students-use-wikipedia
I think the information is mostly reliable which is of course very important. What irks me is that it's often presented in an overcomplicated, fussy way. Also I find it hard to edit and make new articles... so many rules and regulations... but of course loads of people do it so maybe it's just me LOL.
I advise staying away from it as much as possible. There's actually software that graders use while checking papers, and if there's anything that remotely looks like it's from wiki, you're flunked. I'm not sure what the rationale is behind it though.* *I'm thinking plagiarism, but that would go for any other resource as well. Anyways, in the end, whatever source you use, the last line of the article @Wave Surfer linked is important: 'it can only be put to good use when it's in the hands of a discerning and critical student.'
Try to read a paper encyclopedia and share your feelings after IMO Wiki is one of the best things ever. If you're trying to get your head around a new concept quickly, a wikipedia article is often the best place to start. In STEM, 99% of the stuff there is correct and well-written.
There is a Simple Wikipedia. I donate to Wikipedia as it's crucial for democracy to have such tools. Try to find a Chinese or a Russian equivalent.. https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
I always liked to link the Sarcasm wiki page to people who get mad at what I say. May need to do that again.