Wikipedia founder says it is now extremely biased towards the left.

T

Text Drivers are Killers

Joe Biden - "Time to put Trump in the bullseye."
Wiki used to be great but then libs took over and they always ruin everything with their policies of hate america, hate whites, and hate men.

https://districtherald.com/wikipedi...-abandoned-neutrality-policy-is-badly-biased/

may 19 2020 Larry Sanger, the founder of Wikipedia says that the project has abandoned neutrality and is now “badly biased. Sanger is no longer involved with Wikipedia, and his co-founder, Jimmy Wales, is a far-left activist.

In a blog post on Thursday, Sanger wrote a scathing critique of the bias at his former website.

“Wikipedia’s ‘NPOV’ is dead,” Sanger began, referring to the site’s neutral point of view policy.

He specifically pointed to the entries for former President Barack Obama and President Donald Trump as examples.

“The Barack Obama article completely fails to mention many well-known scandals: Benghazi, the IRS scandal, the AP phone records scandal, and Fast and Furious, to say nothing of Solyndra or the Hillary Clinton email server scandal—or, of course, the developing ‘Obamagate’ story in which Obama was personally involved in surveilling Donald Trump,” Sanger explained.
Click to expand...
 
Text Drivers are Killers said:
Wiki used to be great but then libs took over and they always ruin everything with their policies of hate america, hate whites, and hate men.
Click to expand...

Are you that stupid that you don't know what a peer-reviewed encyclopedia is at your age? Unless you're 15 or younger that's embarrassing. No, considering your writing you're just being a trolltard again. Simmer down, Mr. Sterotype Trolled Too Far.
 
Last edited:
AProudLefty said:
Anyone can edit the entries.
Click to expand...

Yes we know that but entries can be locked down as well. Much of the blame I fear goes to the editors who tend to be left leaning. He's absolutely right, it is very much a creature of the Left these days. How else do explain their tendency to disparage any climate scientist that doesn't spout the 'consensus' view?

How can a serious encyclopedia use emotive language like climate denier to describe august scientific luminaries like Fred Singer who died recently. He was born a Jew in Austria and had to flee during the Anschluss to England to escape the Nazis, why he didn't sue the likes of Wiki and a host of climate alarmist blogs I don't know.

Here is a very good example from the Wiki entry on him.

Siegfried Fred Singer (September 27, 1924 – April 6, 2020)[1][2] was an Austrian-born American physicist and emeritus professor of environmental science at the University of Virginia.[3] Trained as an atmospheric physicist, Singer was known for climate change denial,
 
Last edited:
Grajonca said:
Yes we know that but entries can be locked down as well. Much of the blame I fear goes to the editors who tend to be left leaning. He's absolutely right, it is very much a creature of the Left these days. How else do explain their tendency to disparage any climate scientist that doesn't spout the 'consensus' view? How can a serious encyclopedia use emotive language like climate denier to describe august scientific luminaries like Fred Singer who died recently. Here is a very good example from Wiki.

Siegfried Fred Singer (September 27, 1924 – April 6, 2020)[1][2] was an Austrian-born American physicist and emeritus professor of environmental science at the University of Virginia.[3] Trained as an atmospheric physicist, Singer was known for climate change denial,
Click to expand...

They can be locked down? Never heard of that. They constantly do "diff" on entries to see if there's any change. If it's bullshit or troll entry, they revert it to the previous version.
 
Grajonca said:
Yes we know that but entries can be locked down as well. Much of the blame I fear goes to the editors who tend to be left leaning. He's absolutely right, it is very much a creature of the Left these days. How else do explain their tendency to disparage any climate scientist that doesn't spout the 'consensus' view? How can a serious encyclopedia use emotive language like climate denier to describe august scientific luminaries like Fred Singer who died recently. Here is a very good example from Wiki.

Siegfried Fred Singer (September 27, 1924 – April 6, 2020)[1][2] was an Austrian-born American physicist and emeritus professor of environmental science at the University of Virginia.[3] Trained as an atmospheric physicist, Singer was known for climate change denial,
Click to expand...

They haven't quite gotten as bad as rationalwiki, but they're getting there.
 
Democrat Party is the grammatically correct term for the Democratic Party. The Party is not "democratic," and proper nouns like "Democrat" are not converted into adjectives by adding "ic" as a suffix. For example, it is not the "Republicanic Party," or the "Libertarianic Party," or a "Smith-ic Wedding." yet many Democrats bristle at the term "Democrat Party." and perhaps they prefer the false illusion that their party is somehow more "democratic" than other parties. In fact, the Democrat Party is less democratic than the other political parties.

In the 1800s, the Democrat Party was predominantly pro-slavery. Today, the Democrat Party is predominantly pro-abortion.

See what I mean? :laugh:
 
AProudLefty said:
They can be locked down? Never heard of that. They constantly do "diff" on entries to see if there's any change. If it's bullshit or troll entry, they revert it to the previous version.
Click to expand...

you have no clue how wikipedia works. yes, anyone can make edits, but they have admins and they can easily overrule any edit, lockdown a page, ban a person from future edits, etc. Wiki admins exert total control over the site. On popular pages and even niche pages, people will get protectionist over "their" articles and not allow any changes.
 
Cohort said:
you have no clue how wikipedia works. yes, anyone can make edits, but they have admins and they can easily overrule any edit, lockdown a page, ban a person from future edits, etc. Wiki admins exert total control over the site. On popular pages and even niche pages, people will get protectionist over "their" articles and not allow any changes.
Click to expand...

Something I have to learn to be sure. But I do not take claims at face value.
 
AProudLefty said:
It's a funny page to be sure. ;)

Not every Republican is like that but...

Anti-science
Anti-fact
Fake news

Is that in error?
Click to expand...

Compare their assessments of conservatives to the excuses they make for progressives (or the omission of certain less savory things about said progressives).

They also admit their bias on one of their introductory pages, despite not having the honesty to be more forthright in the name of their site.

Conservapedia makes it obvious what their bias is, and they don't have the arrogance to call themselves "rational."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top