Wikipedia Taken over by left

[WillBrink]

Says co creator:

'Nobody should trust Wikipedia,' its co-founder warns: Larry Sanger says site has been taken over by left-wing 'volunteers' who write off sources that don't fit their agenda as fake news

Larry Sanger, 52, co-founded Wikipedia with Jimmy Wales in 2001
He said site has been taken over by Democratic-supporting volunteer editors
Sanger said left-leaning editors do not allow Wikipedia users to edit pages
He mentioned the Wikipedia entry on Joe Biden as example of leftist bias
Biden entry doesn't make mention of scandals and Hunter Biden laptop

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9793263/Nobody-trust-Wikipedia-founder-Larry-Sanger-warns.html?ito=social-twitter_mailonline


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0P4Cf0UCwU&t=516s

[Hank6046]

Do people not know about this? This has been corrupted for some time.

[MikhailBarracuda91]

Yeah wikipedia is about as accurate as Reddit

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[BoringGuy45]

Wikipedia has NEVER been accurate. Anyone in the world can edit it, and though there always has been some moderation, it's an unreliable source. It serves basically one purpose: A starting point to find out what something or who someone is. Beyond that, its accuracy is hit or miss, even if agenda doesn't come into play.

[Jellybean]

Do people not know about this? This has been corrupted for some time.

This. ^^^^

If this is "news" to anyone, they are way behind the curve.

[Alex V]

I thought we all knew this?

[Honu]

ditto others :)

[SteyrAUG]

Snopes says it's not true and this is all fake news.

[titsonritz]

Snopes says it's not true and this is all fake news.

:lol::lol:

I had an instructor that would fail your ass if you used Wikipedia as a source for your papers.

[aFella]

What's the name of that one group who we like that has a bunch of great folks whose purpose is to stealth edit wiki pages again?

[SteyrAUG]

:lol::lol:

I had an instructor that would fail your ass if you used Wikipedia as a source for your papers.

Wiki made lazy people even lazier. You have to actually source check, if the source provided is legit it's reliable information. If the source provided is some blog by somebody you never heard of, it's meaningless. More importantly, if you sourced checked, you didn't HAVE to use Wiki as your source, you could use the actual source.

I know I turned in some serious BS papers in high school, can't imagine how much "copy/paste" material teachers got in the internet age. Ironically again, a tool that was meant to make everyone smarter, ended up making most people even dumber and too lazy to independently verify any of the information.

Funny how we manage to create all the tools we need for the great leap ahead and then use them in the least efficient ways to the point that they actually collectively hold society back. I used to think people were dumber than shit before the internet, I had no idea how good things actually were. People can now believe, and self validate any stupid idea that occurs to them.

[Diamondback]

:lol::lol:

I had an instructor that would fail your ass if you used Wikipedia as a source for your papers.

I aspire to be an instructor and I WILL fail anyone who cites Wikipedia as a source. (What's more, if you do this I WILL see you humiliated in front of the entire class if not campus... funny thing, I had a prof who was a Leftist that would do the same thing to anyone who cited Newsweek as a source.) It's an OK start to LOOK for sources from, but not much more than that.