3 ms·
Are you sure? That article talks about how unbiased Wikipedia is: >Our study finds that crowd-based knowledge production does not result in articles with mor
by three_seagrass 6y ago
Are you sure? That article talks about how unbiased Wikipedia is:
>Our study finds that crowd-based knowledge production does not result in articles with
more biased than articles produced by experts when the crowd-based articles are substantially
revised.
- jjcon 6y ago> when the crowd-based articles are substantially revised. You literally just had to keep reading to find the cases where they do show bias
- brendoelfrendo 6y agoThat's just saying that highly-trafficked, highly-edited articles are going to be less biased than articles with fewer contributors or sources. That... just makes sense, to me; the more visible or relevant an article, the more people (and potentially experts) will weigh in, and the more crowd consensus will drive out the more blatant biases.
- arp242 6y agoIt also mentions there a bias in both directions, depending on the topic. Plus, it only considers US viewpoints/political alignments, and not Canadian, British, Australian, or other countries.
- toomim 6y agoLarry Sanger, the co-founder of Wikipedia, also gives a number of examples of Wikipedia's bias in this article: https://larrysanger.org/2020/05/wikipedia-is-badly-biased/ https://larrysanger.org/2020/05/wikipedia-is-badly-biased/