Wikipedia is terrible. It's pretty obvious a lot of it is literally just made up. Like some 60yo lesbian leftist decided to just makeup a story for some niche thing in history and blasted with everywhere. I've seen way too many patterns like this in Wikipedia. I wouldn't even be shocked to learn the government and major corps were using Wikipedia to test early editions of AI by making stuff up and seeing if people would notice or be able to correct for anything made up.
Wikipedia is useful for things that require hard facts but if you're reading anything that is even slightly subjective, it's brutally bad.
The January 6 and Gamergate articles are notoriously awful, as is the "White Replacement conspiracy theory" one. And I'm scared to even look up Yasuke.
I honestly find the Weatherman and Uncle Ted pages to be just as awful, endless excuses for the Weatherman and claims that they never killed anyone and painting Uncle Ted as Hitler incarnate, and even the first paragraph refuses to call the Weatherman far left while gleefully painting Uncle Ted as far right and no mention of him being an MK Ultra victim either last I saw. They're genuinely the most pathetic and contemptible people imaginable, Wikipedia jannies I mean.
Absolutely. Reminds of the news in my country recently. They announced right wing extremism is statistically the bigger threat and failed to mention all islamists are put into that category. Of course they chose neo nazis as a picture for their article.
And this article here is essentially why. It works fine if everyone is working towards a common goal in good faith; it totally falls to pieces in the face of even mild subversion.
Wikipedia is terrible. It's pretty obvious a lot of it is literally just made up. Like some 60yo lesbian leftist decided to just makeup a story for some niche thing in history and blasted with everywhere. I've seen way too many patterns like this in Wikipedia. I wouldn't even be shocked to learn the government and major corps were using Wikipedia to test early editions of AI by making stuff up and seeing if people would notice or be able to correct for anything made up.
Wikipedia is useful for things that require hard facts but if you're reading anything that is even slightly subjective, it's brutally bad.
The January 6 and Gamergate articles are notoriously awful, as is the "White Replacement conspiracy theory" one. And I'm scared to even look up Yasuke.
I honestly find the Weatherman and Uncle Ted pages to be just as awful, endless excuses for the Weatherman and claims that they never killed anyone and painting Uncle Ted as Hitler incarnate, and even the first paragraph refuses to call the Weatherman far left while gleefully painting Uncle Ted as far right and no mention of him being an MK Ultra victim either last I saw. They're genuinely the most pathetic and contemptible people imaginable, Wikipedia jannies I mean.
I want your opinion on the grokpedia articles. Please read and tell me what you think.
Wasn't there some scheme to delete the early life sections of bios for obvious reasons?
The worst is "far right" vs "far left". "Far right" is handed out like candy, while like 1 member of "the squad" is called "far left".
Absolutely. Reminds of the news in my country recently. They announced right wing extremism is statistically the bigger threat and failed to mention all islamists are put into that category. Of course they chose neo nazis as a picture for their article.
And this article here is essentially why. It works fine if everyone is working towards a common goal in good faith; it totally falls to pieces in the face of even mild subversion.
It's just like jury trials.
I remember when they edited the article on antifa's history because I was sharing it literally everywhere i could