Comment

Comment on ..?

Thank you for sharing the wikipedia article. I hadn’t read it. A lot of people find Wikipedia controversial for various reasons. But it is one of the most precise encyclopedias on the planet. And you can check out editing history etc. What I am most interested in, is the use here ofcourse. Because it seems to me people use it as a vaguely defined slur to slander people they deem to leftist.

source

Sort:hotnew top

brucethemoose@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Yeah, there’s all sorts of crazy political purity tests on Lemmy, and associated misuse of slurs.

And on Wikipedia:

On one side, my MAGA-adjacent family is starting to question it as “liberal biased”… as they leave Fox News blasting in the background.

On the other, tankies and some different leftist extremist leftists dismiss it as propaganda.

That’s a good sign, to me. Its never been perfect and has problems, but extremists trying to tear its credibility down is a sign of just how valuable it is.
source
- flamingleg@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  how about one of the original creators of wikipedia no longer using his own software and encouraging everyone to also not use it? he claims that the cia have been using it as a tool of information warfare since 2003?
  
  I will admit that for shallow questions like ‘did this thing happen in this year’? wikipedia can sometimes be more useful than a plain search engine, also sometimes from wikipedia you can find links to real sources which can also be useful.
  
  source
  - brucethemoose@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    On the contrary, to quote Wikipedia’s article on him:
    
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Sanger
    
    Since Sanger’s departure from Wikipedia, he has been critical of the project, describing it in 2007 as being “broken beyond repair”.[8] He has argued that, despite its merits, Wikipedia lacks credibility and accuracy due to a lack of respect for expertise. Since 2020, he has also accused Wikipedia of having a left-wing and liberal ideological bias in its articles.[9][10] Sanger’s effort to change Wikipedia was seen by some as part of a right-wing attack on Wikipedia.[11][12]
    
    Which lines up with external articles by him I’m reading, including his take on Grokipedia: larrysanger.org/2025/10/grokipedia-a-first-look/
    
    Of course Wikipedia is biased (probably western/liberal biased), astroturfed, and such. But calling it something like a CIA misinformation tool falls into “perfect is the enemy of good” at best, and sounds more like the efforts to tear down its credibility from actors who don’t like what it says abou them.
    
    source
    flamingleg@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    it’s more than simple bias, larry sanger knows that and i suspect that you do as well.
    
    www.mintpressnews.com/…/261022/
    
    source