5 ms·

Can't really trust an academic on this matter, Wikipedia is like academia it's a closed system where a small group get to decide what opinions are correct, what

Can't really trust an academic on this matter, Wikipedia is like academia it's a closed system where a small group get to decide what opinions are correct, what facts get a mention and what are worth looking at with a feedback loop to itself that is used to control facts by deciding what sources are valid. Really the open decentralized internet is the antithesis of academia. Not to say its all bad but reading wikipedia you have to be aware of that it's an opinionated lens of viewing the world, and by not realizing you're viewing through a lens is why over the past decade people keep getting blindsided when reality doesn't play out how their bubble told them it would. Honestly I feel a "metaverse wikipedia" with tabs at the top I could view a topic through different socio/economic/political lenses would be much more useful for actually making sense of the world we have today.

slfnflctd 3y ago
> a "metaverse wikipedia" with tabs at the top I could view a topic through different socio/economic/political lenses I love this idea. Not likely to happen with Wikipedia as it currently exists, but could possibly be built with a Wikipedia article as one of many links listed for a particular subject. Slight tangent, but this is why I go to All Sides News when I feel I need more varied perspective on an issue. I don't use it a lot, but when I do I'm super glad it exists.
carimura 3y ago
> Wikipedia is like academia it's a closed system where a small group get to decide what opinions are correct, what facts get a mention and what are worth looking at with a feedback loop to itself that is used to control facts by deciding what sources are valid Came here to say this. 98% of the content is perfectly fine. Searching for "lemurs" in any search engine returns a perfectly trustworthy (calling all lemur experts!) wikipedia page. But, look for anything divisive, political, cultural, etc., and I've increasingly noticed the articles take clear positions.
- Swenrekcah 3y ago
  I'm actually very curios about this. Can you link to an example of a clear position? I ask because I'm thinking it may be that, as political discourse becomes more polarized, it is conceivable that a mostly neutral article is perceived as biased in the wrong direction by both camps. So if you can find a good example of what you have in mind, it would be really helpful to examine it and see what might be going on.
  - carimura 3y ago
    Specific examples just incite a never-ending low-fidelity Internet debate that I'd really prefer not to get into, but despite my hesitation, I'll risk suggesting that you search for blog posts by the co-founder of Wikipedia Larry Sanger.
    - Swenrekcah 3y ago
      Ok, thanks
hindsightbias 3y ago
Add generational lens. I barely recognize much of the 70's and 80's history on wiki. A lot of it clearly wasn't written by someone who lived through it, and if it isn't linkable it basically doesn't exist. History is written by the victors, and they only do the internet. All those books, newspaper and magazine articles of that era just don't exist outside of libraries and microfiche and it's clear none of those wiki editors are going there. I've seen younger people start to complain about this as link rot reaches into their generation. At least academics have standards, even if they don't always follow them.
- ajsnigrutin 3y ago
  It will only get worse. Even with the internet, there are things (eg. from the beginning of covid), where I clearly remember someone (in my country) saying/promising something, eg. regarding vaccines, anti-covid measures, etc., and those things don't exist anymore. I've found a few articles or transcripts in google cache, but the orignals are gone, archive.org doesn't have them and poof, they're gone. "we've always been saying X" will become the truth, since any record of them saying otherwise has somehow disapeared... and it's only been two years!
- chris_wot 3y ago
  Many of us did actually go to libraries, but we got kicked off the site.
- denton-scratch 3y ago
  > I barely recognize much of the 70's and 80's history on wiki. Yup. History is a battleground; so is politics, and in some cases geography. Even food can be a battleground; "Biryani" is on my watchlist. It is constantly being vandalized, to state that the canonical version belongs to this or that community. Interestingly, articles on religion don't seem to be battlegrounds to anything like the same extent.
- olddustytrail 3y ago
  [flagged]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

slfnflctd 3y ago

> a "metaverse wikipedia" with tabs at the top I could view a topic through different socio/economic/political lenses I love this idea. Not likely to happen with Wikipedia as it currently exists, but could possibly be built with a Wikipedia article as one of many links listed for a particular subject. Slight tangent, but this is why I go to All Sides News when I feel I need more varied perspective on an issue. I don't use it a lot, but when I do I'm super glad it exists.

carimura 3y ago

> Wikipedia is like academia it's a closed system where a small group get to decide what opinions are correct, what facts get a mention and what are worth looking at with a feedback loop to itself that is used to control facts by deciding what sources are valid Came here to say this. 98% of the content is perfectly fine. Searching for "lemurs" in any search engine returns a perfectly trustworthy (calling all lemur experts!) wikipedia page. But, look for anything divisive, political, cultural, etc., and I've increasingly noticed the articles take clear positions.

Swenrekcah 3y ago
I'm actually very curios about this. Can you link to an example of a clear position? I ask because I'm thinking it may be that, as political discourse becomes more polarized, it is conceivable that a mostly neutral article is perceived as biased in the wrong direction by both camps. So if you can find a good example of what you have in mind, it would be really helpful to examine it and see what might be going on.
- carimura 3y ago
  Specific examples just incite a never-ending low-fidelity Internet debate that I'd really prefer not to get into, but despite my hesitation, I'll risk suggesting that you search for blog posts by the co-founder of Wikipedia Larry Sanger.
  - Swenrekcah 3y ago
    Ok, thanks

hindsightbias 3y ago

Add generational lens. I barely recognize much of the 70's and 80's history on wiki. A lot of it clearly wasn't written by someone who lived through it, and if it isn't linkable it basically doesn't exist. History is written by the victors, and they only do the internet. All those books, newspaper and magazine articles of that era just don't exist outside of libraries and microfiche and it's clear none of those wiki editors are going there. I've seen younger people start to complain about this as link rot reaches into their generation. At least academics have standards, even if they don't always follow them.

ajsnigrutin 3y ago
It will only get worse. Even with the internet, there are things (eg. from the beginning of covid), where I clearly remember someone (in my country) saying/promising something, eg. regarding vaccines, anti-covid measures, etc., and those things don't exist anymore. I've found a few articles or transcripts in google cache, but the orignals are gone, archive.org doesn't have them and poof, they're gone. "we've always been saying X" will become the truth, since any record of them saying otherwise has somehow disapeared... and it's only been two years!
chris_wot 3y ago
Many of us did actually go to libraries, but we got kicked off the site.
denton-scratch 3y ago
> I barely recognize much of the 70's and 80's history on wiki. Yup. History is a battleground; so is politics, and in some cases geography. Even food can be a battleground; "Biryani" is on my watchlist. It is constantly being vandalized, to state that the canonical version belongs to this or that community. Interestingly, articles on religion don't seem to be battlegrounds to anything like the same extent.
olddustytrail 3y ago
[flagged]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]