4 ms·
Larry Sanger apparently co-founded Wikipedia but I've somehow never heard of him before. Not sure how that escaped me. He's apparently famously critical of Wik
by LeoPanthera 6y ago
Larry Sanger apparently co-founded Wikipedia but I've somehow never heard of him before. Not sure how that escaped me.
He's apparently famously critical of Wikipedia. The majority of this article seems to complain about giving facts undue prominence over a "balance" of viewpoints.
What's the opposing viewpoint to the truth? Lies?
(And his political bias really shows. The Obama article is too positive. The Trump article is too negative. The article about abortion doesn't say how evil it is. And the global warming and vaccine pages don't report enough on "minority viewpoints". It's amazing how consistent the beliefs of the far-right are.)
From my non-expert perspective, Wikipedia is doing a surprisingly good job. Even this article actually gives me confidence.
- LyndsySimon 6y agoFor what it’s worth, I’ve encountered right-skewed articles many times in the past. They seem to be on less popular topics, but they absolutely exist.
- ScottFree 6y agoThey exist on far more than just less popular topics. You just never see them. Anything even slightly right of center tends to get censored for hate speech.
- LeoPanthera 6y agoThis has never been more appropriate: [Citation Needed]
- ScottFree 6y agopats you on the head you're adorable. If I were to say "water is wet" would you want proof of that too?
- yellowapple 6y agoYep. I was hoping this would be about e.g. Wikipedia silencing any mention of that one rich guy who married his own daughter and other cases where Wikipedia is not holding to its stated policies, but the examples in this article only seemed to validate the notion that Wikipedia might actually be neutral.