251–260 of 498 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It absolutely matched the Wikipedia summary. There is a ton of evidence linked supporting each point: it was a hate mob from the moment Eron Gjoni decided his ex should be punished for breaking up with him.
> from the moment Eron Gjoni decided his ex should be punished for breaking up with him. There was no such moment in the first place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You miss the point. It's about those people being misinformed, unwilling to look into matters independently, and selective in the application of their supposed ideological principles.
Does "someone doesn't know trivia about the inflection point" really demonstrate any of those things? Like, if I asked you whether the anger at Depression Quest was downstream of a long-standing meme-feud on /v/ about whether visual novels are videogames and you didn't know that, that doesn't really mean anything about your understanding of anything other than /v/ culture wars of the 2010s. I mean, c'mon, "five guys…
I do believe that Wikipedia is one of the least biased sources out there, but there is definitely bias. Here is a concrete example. Compare the introduction paragraph of the English circumcision article ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision ) with the German one ( https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zirkumzision ). The English intro talks a lot about medical advantages of the procedure: "reduced rates of sexually tr…
It is not possible to have unbiased communication. Whenever you communicate with someone, you do it because you think it's important that the other person hears what you're about to say. This means that you filter all communication through your own moral system, which obviously has biases. When people say "this is unbiased" they usually mean "this matches the biases of my culture". Wikipedia illustrates this very wel…
Wikipedia is a treasure
While I don’t mean to equate both, I find the resemblance in this case striking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Bothsidesism" is a tired argument. Somehow if you don't think that one side of a debate is utter evil and the other side is as pure as the driven snow, you're engaging in "bothsidesism" if you acknowledge there are any shades of gray in the world. Which is a childish argument for anyone older than a high school sophomore.
> tired What relevance does that have to truth? I'm tired of online disinformation; should I say it's a tired issue and therefore irrelevant? Denial that bothsidesism exists, or being tired of dealing with the problem, is irrelevant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can't wait for the specific examples
This kind of bias is a statistical measure; typically you can't prove or disprove it using a single sample. It's about larger patterns, which things are talked about and (crucially) which are not. How much attention is given to things and not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does this relate to a particular domain or field? I find it so good, and on the rare occasion I’ve found something wrong, I’ve fixed it.
[dead]
Wikipedia is overall excellent, and it has certainly brought enormous value to me throughout the years. But it is noticeably biased on any topic that has political implications.
Can't wait for the specific examples
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a reason why historians tend to view anything more recent than 10-20 years ago as politics. If you don't want to get embroiled in political debates, stick to stuff old enough to be history. There's still politics there, but it's less raw. Wikipedia doesn't restrict itself to topics that are older than ten years ago, so some of their material is necessarily going to be viewed as political. e.g. Wikipedia has a…
I'm also not American so I'm not well-versed in this topic, but perhaps to raise the obvious: Does Wikipedia really need a page running for thousands of words on Musk allegedly making a Nazi salute? It's longer than some of the content on major historical figures, yet this is a subject that I'd be surprised to see mentioned again after a few years have passed. Considering that the subject matter is highly sensitive a…
That being said, there should be absolutely no regard for "sensitivity" or the fact that Musk is a living person. He is a public figure wielding a ridiculous amount of resources to reshape the world as he sees fit. Regardless of his virtues or shortcomings, his power makes him somebody that should be watched closely. He helped shape the last U.S. election, played a key role in this presidency, and promises to continue his influence in the mid-terms. It matters if he's a Nazi.
Kudos to Wikipedia for leaving that page up.