4 ms·
Yes agreed, for example, there was an interesting table on the starlink page I used to check every so often showing which countries had access to starlink as it
by martinald 4mo ago
Yes agreed, for example, there was an interesting table on the starlink page I used to check every so often showing which countries had access to starlink as it was rolled out. Was interesting to see the expansion.
Of course, some editor decided it was 'marketing' for starlink so it got deleted despite loads of people protesting. It was the only source I could find easily for showing which country got starlink when.
A huge list of prose is still on the page (not marketing?) showing the updates in a very hard to read and not comprehensive way. Something is really quite wrong over there.
- ieie3366 4mo agoIt’s a shame :( There’s a lot of blatantly incorrect information on wikipedia, and i’ve had multiple wikipedia edits reverted due to ’bad sources’
- ieie3366 4mo agoAnd the worst is the cycle: 1. There is incorrect information on wikipedia. 2. Legacy news publishes an article, using wikipedia as source (of course). 3. Now the incorrect information is essentially canonized
- JdeBP 4mo agoOn the other hand, some of the best is when a hoax written by a monk in the north of England some time around 1300 is debunked by late 20th century scholarship, and eventually someone makes Wikipedia no longer re-hash a propagandist revision of the Battle of Stirling Bridge re-set in Wales that stood unchallenged for almost 7 centuries. * https://youtube.com/v/mLdB5s7-h0w https://youtube.com/v/mLdB5s7-h0w * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Battle_of_Orewin_Bridge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletio...
- SanjayMehta 4mo agoCircular references. This methodology has been called out by several researchers. NYT, WaPo are key users of this technique. Off the top of my head: https://citationintegrity.org/ https://citationintegrity.org/ Wikipedia features prominently as a defaulter.
- ImPostingOnHN 4mo agoI don't know that some dude's blog is an accurate judge of the listed entities
- card_zero 4mo agoCitogenesis, a well-known hazard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_citogenesis_incidents https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_citogenesis_...
- Akronymus 4mo agoor: 1: the media has a vested interest in only reporting a certain slant, because it involves criticizing the media 2: because the media is the only source deemed reliable, that slant becomes the truth
- amiga386 4mo agoIf you spot it in Wikipedia, point it out, it does get removed. Leaving a comment on the talk page <!-- or in the article --> gets editors on-board to patrol for accidental attempts to add the incorrect information back in. Wikipedia does not like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citogenesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citogenesis
- frm88 4mo ago>There is incorrect information on wikipedia. Wikipedia has an article titled “Yahweh.” Now, as I am a Christian,[8] "Yahweh" is the name of my God.[0] This is one of Sanger's proposed changes and this is not an undisputed fact, more like a dispute among theologicans [1] and with the confidence he wants this change implemented, I am highly sceptical, that misinformation will decrease. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Larry_Sanger/Nine_Theses#2._Enable_competing_articles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Larry_Sanger/Nine_Theses#.... [1] https://christianeducatorsacademy.com/is-yahweh-the-christian-god-a-critical-examination/#Theological_Arguments_for_and_Against_Yahweh_as_the_Christian_God https://christianeducatorsacademy.com/is-yahweh-the-christia...
- Wowfunhappy 4mo ago> There was an interesting table on the starlink page I used to check every so often showing which countries had access to starlink as it was rolled out. Was interesting to see the expansion. [...] Of course, some editor decided it was 'marketing' for starlink so it got deleted despite loads of people protesting. ...I mean, yeah, that doesn't sound particularly encyclopedic. "Marketing" might be a bit strong but that doesn't mean it belongs in a general encyclopedia.
- martinald 4mo agoWhy not? It's the first time many developing countries have had access to high quality internet at an often relatively affordable price?
- FireBeyond 4mo agoHuh, ironically, the opposite happened with Tesla, when numerous editors warred to include a model on the list of "Fastest Production Vehicles", even though the model hadn't been released, based on a press release from Tesla (and even that said it was a simulated, expected number). It got to the point where there was a column for "verified" numbers, others, and then "Manufacturer projected" numbers.
- YoshiRulz 4mo agoIn that specific case, you could add those data to Wikidata https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q19867977#P2541 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q19867977#P2541