Wikipedia is so soy at times. With every wiki i have some problem. Incels wiki mogs wikipedia. Edramatica (it's a troll wiki) has some obscure info about various ERs. Metapedia is a fascist wiki you can use also.
Wikipedia has a stringent neutrality policy, but despite this, clearly bias streams through. I only stay on the math portions of that wiki a bit.
It's clearly woke biased, every article about someone who is a bit conservative is negative at an absurd point.
Wikipedia:Neutral point of view - Wikipedia
Nice jokeWikipedia:Neutral point of view - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
They clearly aren't neutral when it comes to politics, they just repeat what mainstream media says.
I mean the media are newspapers of record.
Which all of them are also woke biased.
Literally just a true statement. Not everything you disagree is left wing propganda
I remember i checked internet archive and wikipedia ised to have an unbiased article about fascism explaining the third position, Giovanni Gentile etc, nowadays it says that it's right-wing militant dictatorship, the classic reddit "capitalism in decay" bullshit.
They undercount left-wing violence by leaving out stuff like recent troon chimpouts. They’ll count an attack as right wing if the perpetrator was (regardless of if the attack had a political motive or not), but don’t apply the same logic the other way
I'm sure they didn't count Charlie Kirk murder as left wing terrorism.
Ok but still than. There is more right wing terroist attacks than left wing. Like people are more likely to get slimed out by a chud compared to a transgender
The sources are right there, lol
Well it's a jewish controled website that only publishes allied propaganda.
Wikipedia use source from journalist who claim to be "expert" but are just people who have informations and interpret with their ideology. You should never trust an opinion like it's dogmatic (that ironically include my own opinion).
Its because right-wing ideologies are harder to categorize, because right-wingers don't fully muh trends or the in-grouping as the ones on the left. so they just categorize everybody who has right-wing views or syncretism. its stupid.
Those journalists are all radical wokism supporters, they are basically redditors with a journalism degree.
The "source": a redditor with a journalism degree
Literal tranny janniesAnd if you try to edit it, woke mods that rule Wikipedia ban you
And if you try to edit it, woke mods that rule Wikipedia ban you
Ideological bias on Wikipedia - Wikipedia
And if you try to edit it, woke mods that rule Wikipedia ban you
The most controversial topics in Wikipedia: A multilingual and geographical analysis
We present, visualize and analyse the similarities and differences between the controversial topics related to "edit wars" identified in 10 different language versions of Wikipedia. After a brief review of the related work we describe the methods developed to locate, measure, and categorize the...
arxiv.org
Is Wikipedia Biased? - American Economic Association
Is Wikipedia Biased? by Shane Greenstein and Feng Zhu. Published in volume 102, issue 3, pages 343-48 of American Economic Review, May 2012, Abstract: This study empirically examines whether Wikipedia has a neutral point of view. It develops a method for measuring the slant of 28 thousand...
doi.org
The Wisdom of Polarized Crowds
As political polarization in the United States continues to rise, the question of whether polarized individuals can fruitfully cooperate becomes pressing. Although diversity of individual perspectives typically leads to superior team performance on complex tasks, strong political perspectives...
arxiv.org
Yeah sure, read any article about a local conservative party and look what Wikipedia says "far right extremist"The most controversial topics in Wikipedia: A multilingual and geographical analysis
We present, visualize and analyse the similarities and differences between the controversial topics related to "edit wars" identified in 10 different language versions of Wikipedia. After a brief review of the related work we describe the methods developed to locate, measure, and categorize the...Is Wikipedia Biased? - American Economic Association
Is Wikipedia Biased? by Shane Greenstein and Feng Zhu. Published in volume 102, issue 3, pages 343-48 of American Economic Review, May 2012, Abstract: This study empirically examines whether Wikipedia has a neutral point of view. It develops a method for measuring the slant of 28 thousand...doi.orgThe Wisdom of Polarized Crowds
As political polarization in the United States continues to rise, the question of whether polarized individuals can fruitfully cooperate becomes pressing. Although diversity of individual perspectives typically leads to superior team performance on complex tasks, strong political perspectives...
No i agree with you. I think Wikipedia is biased against right-wing sources, and wikipedia itself acknowledges this. Read through the studies.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
