you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 21 insightful - 1 fun21 insightful - 0 fun22 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Wikipedia has been a biased, inaccurate source of information for a long time. There are mods who gaurd the pages of their pet subjects against intruders - even if it's a credentialed expert trying to correct misinformation. It's ridiculous.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 12 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Wikipedia has always been biased, the very nature of the platform gives it a bias towards popular opinion over factual evidence, or at least so far as popular opinion amongst those that edit Wikipedia.

And just as always Wikipedia isn't an authoritative source and shouldn't be cited. I'll give no credit for Wikipedia sources, it is an excellent index of sources however if you're using it to find other sources.

[–]RedEyedWarriorThe Evil Cishomo 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

When I went to college, my lecturers did not count Wikipedia articles as sources. A large portion of your marks for an essay went towards references and you got no marks for referencing Wikipedia articles. Which they are right to do. I did look at the sources those articles used

[–]Smarterthanlastweek2 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I did look at the sources those articles used

Right, but now sources that editors don't want known won't be included.

[–]RedEyedWarriorThe Evil Cishomo 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Exactly. Fuck Wikipedia.

[–]send_nasty_stuff 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Wikipedia has always been biased, the very nature of the platform gives it a bias towards popular opinion over factual evidence,

That might have been a reason for bias when it started but it's not the reason for bias today.