Whether or not we can fully trust Wikipedia is one thing, and it is true that truth should not just be a result of frequency counting. I'd say Wikipedia, like

Whether or not we can fully trust Wikipedia is one thing, and it is true that truth should not just be a result of frequency counting. I'd say Wikipedia, like the scientific process, works in the limit; any snapshot may contain errors, but there's a process for weeding out errors that leads to conversion towards the right direction, if not always in a strictly monotonic fashion. There are countries in which things said on Wikipedia are not permissible to be viewed, or where it is banned in whole. I prefer to live in a place where you can view everything (e.g, [1,2]) and make up your mind for yourself, weighing the evidence. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20110512173914/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2009280577_apchinabornonthefourth.html https://web.archive.org/web/20110512173914/http://seattletim... [2] https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%85%AD%E5%9B%9B%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6 https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%85%AD%E5%9B%9B%E4%BA%8B%E4... [3] https://www.history.com/news/who-was-the-tank-man-of-tiananmen-square https://www.history.com/news/who-was-the-tank-man-of-tiananm...