The actual article is ridiculous, but I think there's a difference between something like wikipedia and hacker news. Wikipedia purports itself as being an objec

The actual article is ridiculous, but I think there's a difference between something like wikipedia and hacker news. Wikipedia purports itself as being an objective, unbiased, referenced source of information, hacker news on the other hand is very clear with its biases and rules. I don't partake in wiki editing myself, other than I think one or two articles on bats back in the day, but i have noticed articles on certain topics can lean heavily one way or another, lack proper citations and don't allow edits, that seems kind of propagandaish to me. At that point, it's not an objective encyclopedia entry, it's a subjective opinion from one of the editors with the ability to lock out others.