I’ve often said that liberals treat Wikipedia as Holy Scripture, and your comment is exactly that: an assertion that a particular work provides direct access to Truth. That anything it states is inherently “fact”.
It just lists facts. You go on there and try putting on a political opinion that isn’t actually facts based you’ll be shut down within seconds.
BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 6 days ago
echodot@feddit.uk 6 days ago
Well it says the earth is a sphere so I guess I get where you’re coming from. The problem is you haven’t actually provided any evidence to your claim that it’s some kind of evil liberal bias.
BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 6 days ago
I’ll bet Grokipedia states the earth is a sphere too. Does it also “just list facts”
I also don’t see you providing any evidence for your claim that Wikipedia “just lists facts”.
Nalivai@lemmy.world 6 days ago
The evidence for it is Wikipedia itself. If you have a concrete example of it siting something demonstrably wrong, bring it up, we can examine it here and if you are right, even fix it.
echodot@feddit.uk 6 days ago
So you’re doing the classic thing of putting the burden of responsibility for your ridiculous claim on to somebody else to disprove. A classic sign of somebody not arguing in good faith.
How can I prove that Wikipedia only lists facts since any evidence that I present, you will immediately disregard as untrue because of your preconceived bias.
I want you to link to any article, on any subject matter on Wikipedia (in English so we can actually read it, I know that trick) that proves your claim of bias. I genuinely don’t believe you will be able to because if you could provide this evidence, you would have linked to it in your original comment.
Your holy scripture arguement doesn’t work because Wikipedia isn’t a fixed source of stated reality, it’s a constantly changing constantly updated website. We know the Bible isn’t objective reality because we’ve had it for a very long time and have been able to test it against known historical accounts, and they don’t match up. Wikipedia on the other hand is updated millions of times a day. Even if an article had some bias, by the end of the first day that bias would have been corrected by someone who didn’t like the bias. But you’re stating that there is a deep rooted institutional bias. I’d like you to indicate it please.
umbrella@lemmy.ml 6 days ago
it lists facts based on sources that might be biased.
the guy is right in that quite a bunch of sources lean center-right.