Submission + - Wikipedia and wokism is under attack (msn.com) 3
An anonymous reader writes: https://www.msn.com/en-us/poli...
For many people who have tried to participate in Wikipedia it has been long known to be run by a select few "volunteers" who has a mangle of rules and commitees that make it impossible for regular people, or even professionals in the area of expertise, to make an impact.
This has left it as a tool for select publicity hounds, and an echo chanber for a small segment of deveoped activists (Who Jimmy caled is nice nerds). One thing that will never get into wikipedea is the truth of any contraversal topic, or any comments against a well fundered interest.
At one point, for example, it was decided that every biography had to has a section on with idle speculation of the homosexual proclivities of every and any historical figure. Objecting to a section on Goerge Washington's, William Shaskepears, or King Alfred's sexual preferences would be relentlessly attacked.
And so it goes with many aspects of Wikipedea. Waves of political activism swap its pages.
Now the conservative right is taking aim at the process. They rightfully point out that opinions and interests that hold sway over the project distorts of any real truth. Just compare it to a real encylopedia with professional editors. It is no surprise that we have reached this point. Oversite of Wikipedea is long in coming.
For many people who have tried to participate in Wikipedia it has been long known to be run by a select few "volunteers" who has a mangle of rules and commitees that make it impossible for regular people, or even professionals in the area of expertise, to make an impact.
This has left it as a tool for select publicity hounds, and an echo chanber for a small segment of deveoped activists (Who Jimmy caled is nice nerds). One thing that will never get into wikipedea is the truth of any contraversal topic, or any comments against a well fundered interest.
At one point, for example, it was decided that every biography had to has a section on with idle speculation of the homosexual proclivities of every and any historical figure. Objecting to a section on Goerge Washington's, William Shaskepears, or King Alfred's sexual preferences would be relentlessly attacked.
And so it goes with many aspects of Wikipedea. Waves of political activism swap its pages.
Now the conservative right is taking aim at the process. They rightfully point out that opinions and interests that hold sway over the project distorts of any real truth. Just compare it to a real encylopedia with professional editors. It is no surprise that we have reached this point. Oversite of Wikipedea is long in coming.
The Wales delusion.. (Score:2)
Still, Wales said, the community takes criticisms about adhering to neutral points of view seriously and has a special working committee reviewing its practices. “The neutral point of view is nonnegotiable,” he said.
That quote would be funny if it was being serious
Dozens of Wikipedia editors colluded on years-long (Score:2)
Dozens of Wikipedia editors colluded on years-long anti-Israel campaign, bombshell ADL report claims
https://nypost.com/2025/03/18/... [nypost.com]
If you are from a struggling ethnic minority of Jews, don't expect any truth from wikipedia which is flooded with a billion Muslims, many writing weakly peer reviewed papers in academia.
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.tandfonline.com/do... [tandfonline.com]
ABSTRACT
This essay uncovers the systematic, intentional distortion of Holocaust history on the English-language Wikipedia, the world’s largest encyclopedia. In the last decade, a group of committed Wikipedia editors have been promoting a skewed version of history on Wikipedia, one touted by right-wing Polish nationalists, which whitewashes the role of Polish society in the Holocaust and bolsters stereotypes about Jews. Due to this group’s zealous handiwork, Wikip