ANY source of information that is widely trusted is automatically a target for propaganda and politically-charged misinformation. The more trusted it is, the more incentive everyone has to inject their political agendas (or just political biases) into it.
This, of course, reduces the trust level, which is bad for the business of whoever is hosting it. So they respond by doing stuff like this, to try and restore the trust level.
If they succeed in restoring trust, they also succeed in strengthening the incen
The problem with Wikipedia is that it will accept (practically all) news sources as citations without considering how often the news gets things wrong even for innocuous reasons such as the reporters not having a good enough understanding of the domain on which they're reporting to report on it accurately. Never mind the other interesting problems [xkcd.com] that can occur which create facts out of thin air. Limiting citations to primary sources would probably help clear up a lot of the misinformation. Any article bas
Or did someone's feelings get hurt again?
ANY source of information that is widely trusted is automatically a target for propaganda and politically-charged misinformation. The more trusted it is, the more incentive everyone has to inject their political agendas (or just political biases) into it.
This, of course, reduces the trust level, which is bad for the business of whoever is hosting it. So they respond by doing stuff like this, to try and restore the trust level.
If they succeed in restoring trust, they also succeed in strengthening the incen
The current draft is https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik... [wikimedia.org]
Feelings ARE facts, to an increasing and increasingly loud minority. They don't understand the concept of "subjective truth".