Wikipedia’s credibility is under attack from pro-Israel critics and right-wing voices such as Elon Musk

  • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    4 days ago

    Reminder that Wikipedia is not a source, its just a bunch of nerds creating version of reality through consensus*

    *and its easy to just create sockpuppets and pretend you are different editors when they are all just one person (or organization), and manufacture a false consensus

    • ByGourou@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      It isn’t easy to create sockpuppets because in case of a fight like here, Wikipedia decisions are taken by the oldest members. 20 new accounts can’t override the decision of a 10 years old account with a lot of contributions.

      Wikipedia has its issues, but not this one.

    • ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      Damn the downvotes. Where is OP wrong?

      1. Wikipedia CEO literally said that’s what he wants. He wants people to debate. He’s done interviews where he doesn’t want a single person to be the source of truth. The chaos is what brings consensus.

      2. You have to be stupid if you don’t think companies don’t pay people for this. It’s really not difficult to hire a “Reputation Management” team to sprinkle positive information or at least control it. Im in team meetings about it, where we have staff members who moderate major social groups and lie about endorsements.

      • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        4 days ago

        While it’s correct to say that wikipedia is not an “original” source, it’s disingenuous and / or hyperbole to suggest that “it’s a bunch of nerds creating a version of reality”.

        The vast majority of hours invested into wikipedia are provided by volunteers who believe in the freedom of accurate, factual, unbiased information.

        Of course the quality or balance of information is threatened by bad actors, but significant resources are invested in mitigating that threat. This post is a great example of cautious, transparent editorial decisions.