this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2023
428 points (100.0% liked)

196

16473 readers
2187 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 128 points 11 months ago (3 children)

As it should. Wikipedia vandalism is just annoying.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I wasn't even able to find the revision, it seems the person who made the meme just used the editor to make the edit, then took a screenshot of the preview but didn't publish it.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I would generally agree with you, though there was one incident last year regarding Mike Graham and his comments about growing concrete that gave me a good laugh. Reading through the Wikipedia edits on his page from the end August 2022 is pure comedic gold.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:History/Mike_Graham_(journalist)&offset=20230221142746

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago

Vandalizing Wikipedia is wrong. That being said, this is some of the funniest shit I've read this year. I think my favorite edit was the one that simply put "journalist" in quotes

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Wikipedia has a bias, don't fool yourself.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 11 months ago

Don't fool myself about what?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago

Yes, exactly. Anything perceived as "neutral" or "nonbiased" is just your bias being reflected.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

The specific methods that Wikipedia uses to determine whether a source is reliable causes it to have a status quo bias towards capitalist neoliberalism. There's also a bit of consent manufacturing that occurs on sources and controversial topics.

Don't get me wrong, Wikipedia is great in most situations. However when it comes to controversial (especially political) topics, look elsewhere.