4 ms·
Wikipedia Is Here to Stay
- thriftwy 3y ago[flagged]
- andrewshadura 3y ago[flagged]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- 38 3y ago[flagged]
- Swizec 3y ago> Personally, I would rather read content that is likely correct, with a flag that the content is currently unsourced, then to have nothing at all Funfact: This is dangerous! We have a bias towards believing written information. Even if we are told "What you are about to read is wrong", you are then more likely to believe what you've read than before you read it. https://dtg.sites.fas.harvard.edu/Gilbert%20et%20al%20%28EVERYTHING%20YOU%20READ%29.pdf https://dtg.sites.fas.harvard.edu/Gilbert%20et%20al%20%28EVE...
- 38 3y agoI am an adult. I would rather have (clearly labeled) possibly incorrect information, than no information. dont treat people like children.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- balder1991 3y agoBut you have to consider Wikipedia is made to serve everyone, including the less enlightened. The way I see it, if information without a source is allowed, it can quickly get out of hand.
- 1970-01-01 3y ago[flagged]
- 38 3y ago[flagged]
- thriftwy 3y agoWhen we still had Visa I did donate them here and there. And then they have decided to cancel my country, with editors bragging about "eradricating fascist media". Lost some money but got important life takeway. I also like how every comment under the article is heavily downvoted. Parliament, as it was said, is not a place for discussion.
- 1970-01-01 3y agoNot sure why my comment was flagged, but all it takes is one donation for their system to continuously beg you for more, even while they are millions of dollars ahead of their goals. Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32840097 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32840097
- pvg 3y agoIt's probably because it's not in any way related to this post, just a repetitive and snarky generic Wikipedia fundraising gripe which, as you point out, appears on the site often enough beside being against the site guidelines in its form.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- boxergeorge 3y ago[dead]
- duckhelmet 3y ago[dead]
- didntcheck 3y ago[flagged]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- pikseladam 3y agoI don't trust Wikipedia for historical and political matters. A group of people can focus on an article and do whatever they want with it. They can even prevent others from changing it. Some countries have their own editorial groups and can easily form a closed group of imports that support each other and provide each other with endless resources. https://www.wired.com/story/wikipedia-state-sponsored-disinformation/ https://www.wired.com/story/wikipedia-state-sponsored-disinf... https://slate.com/technology/2021/03/japanese-wikipedia-misinformation-non-english-editions.html https://slate.com/technology/2021/03/japanese-wikipedia-misi...