Reference.com VS Scholarpedia

This wasn't for my team but, I was looking in this comment section for any mention of Billy Butler. Couldn't find any after maybe 2-3 minutes of looking. I remembered him being better than his stats on baseball-reference.com say he is. Maybe that was because I used to play a lot of MLB 2K11 when I was a younger. Source: about 1 year ago

You can use WSJT-X,FLDigi,and other programs with the sdr software,but I'm no help there,as I use ham transcievers for digital. Look on radio https://reference.com for just about anything that you're interested in. It even has a state by state section.along with a database for cities and counties. You can spend a long time on that site,and learn a lot. Source: over 1 year ago

I think a lot of this depends on the site from where Microsoft culls their answers. For rat, the first that pops up when selecting it says a baby rat is a "kit," but if you search, it changes. Squeaks and nibbles says, "A baby rat is called a kitten or a pup," whereas reference.com says "a baby rat is called a pup.". Source: over 1 year ago

Baseball reference.com shows him at 0 runs on defense, so perfectly average. NOt sure what you're looking at. I suppose statcast? I will have a look there. Source: almost 2 years ago

The TOP response (reference.com) says 800f open air to 1500 ideal. Source: almost 2 years ago

Scholarpedia[1] also exists, but is very sparse and mostly a specialist reference. [1] https://scholarpedia.org/. - Source: Hacker News / 6 months ago