Wikipedia is dead to me.

[AureliusMaximus]

Wikipedia was great idea but now have tuned into a non trustable source of information.

Now the co-founder too admits that:
Wikipedia Co-Founder Criticizes Site, Says It Has Slid Into ‘Leftist Propaganda.

Wikipedia Co-Founder Criticizes Site, Says It Has Slid Into ‘Leftist Propaganda’

www.theepochtimes.com

Even more:

Inside Wikipedia's leftist bias: socialism pages whitewashed, communist atrocities buried

Big tech is under fire for bias and censorship, but one outlet has escaped much scrutiny: Wikipedia.

www.foxnews.com

Wikipedia Foundation Approves Leftist ‘Code of Conduct’

The Wikimedia Foundation, which owns Wikipedia, announced last week that its Board of Trustees has approved a new “code of conduct” for the site and its affiliated sites. Plans for a code of conduct had been announced last year and an early draft pushing left-wing identity politics submitted for...

www.breitbart.com

https://www.republicworld.com/techn...ust-it-wikipedia-co-founder-larry-sanger.html

'Nobody should trust Wikipedia,' co-founder Larry Sanger warns

Larry Sanger (left), 53, co-founded Wikipedia in 2001 alongside Jimmy Wales, said the crowdsourcing project has betrayed its original mission by reflecting the views of the 'establishment.'

www.dailymail.co.uk

In other words; don't believe anything that is written on Wikipedia as they censor, lie and cheat and cover up anything to fit their agenda..

Buy a real encyclopedia instead which is trustable source of information and all where information has been verified through multiple sources.

 

[FlexpertHamilton]

Wikipedia has always been a joke, I only ever used it for basic information. I've definitely noticed this trend over the years though.

Anyone who thinks it's an authority (or who think authority = truth) are morons anyway.

 

[EyeBRollin]

The OP posts biased opinion pieces from right-wing propaganda websites calling Wikipedia “biased.”

Classic.

 

[SargeMaximus]

Shocker

 

[FlexpertHamilton]

The OP posts biased opinion pieces from right-wing propaganda websites calling Wikipedia “biased.”

Classic.

Well no ****, why would any leftist websites acknowledge that Wikipedia was taken over by leftists?

 

[EyeBRollin]

Well no ****, why would any leftist websites acknowledge that Wikipedia was taken over by leftists?

A credible allegation would be from a non-partisan fact checker or media evaluation organization. A right wing blog calling Wikipedia “left wing” has no credibility. The pot calling the kettle black…

 

[AureliusMaximus]

Wikipedia has always been a joke, I only ever used it for basic information. I've definitely noticed this trend over the years though.

Anyone who thinks it's an authority (or who think authority = truth) are morons anyway.

Well in the past it could at least be used to check some non vital/non critial information, but these days its a total joke and useless.

Many people do still use it though because they think it is a creditble sournce which it is not.
People need to stop using and referring to it.

 

[FlexpertHamilton]

A credible allegation would be from a non-partisan fact checker or media evaluation organization.

Those do not exist.

 

[AureliusMaximus]

I agree; it's disheartening witnessing everything slip into this leftist SJW nonsense.

However, I don't think anyone should've been using Wiki as an entirely trusted resource in the first place if I'm honest. I only ever used Wiki for trivial things like reviewing an NBA players' biography or some ****. I'm also guilty of having trolled several pages with nonsense material just for a cheap laugh.

Same.
I used it the same way in the past, but now it is almost not worhty of that even anymore.

 

[EyeBRollin]

Those do not exist.

Wrong. They do. And Fox News / Breitbart ain’t it.

 

[FlexpertHamilton]

Wrong. They do. And Fox News / Breitbart ain’t it.

Name one, i'd love to have it as a reference.

 

[EyeBRollin]

Name one, i'd love to have it as a reference.

Politifact.

Fox News and Breitbart can’t credibly call anything biased.

 

[EyeBRollin]

How dare you criticize the media you racist, bigot, trump supporting pieces of ****!

Let’s criticize the media using credible sources.

 

[Alvafe]

actaully wikipedia was never trusted, you can take as a extra source but you will need to confirm it even more, hell if you ever had to do a paper in college you know very well no one would let you put anything if you linked wikipedia as a source of anything

again guys its internet, you need to learn to collect info and search for at least 3 sources before you think maybe its right, that is what freedom is you are free to tell the truth and lie, with is a better option then having people choose what you should know and not,

 

[AureliusMaximus]

Politifact

LOL ha ha they hard hard left bias. But please do carry on your pipe dream.

 

[EyeBRollin]

LOL ha ha they hard hard left bias. But please do carry on your pipe dream.

No. Fox News / Breitbart calling someone biased is like a fat person telling others how to lose weight.

 

[FlexpertHamilton]

No. Fox News / Breitbart calling someone biased is like a fat person telling others how to lose weight.

The point is that there is no unbiased source of news or information generally. The only people who get into journalism/reporting are ones with an agenda.

 

[Stuffnu]

Regardless of political viewpoints. Bias will always lean towards the source of there paycheck.

 

[EyeBRollin]

The point is that there is no unbiased source of news or information generally. The only people who get into journalism/reporting are ones with an agenda.

No. There are sources with minimal political bias that skew towards the objective truth. Those sources are not “left wing” because they contradict Fox News and Breitbart.

Regardless of political viewpoints. Bias will always lean towards the source of there paycheck.

Non-profit sources are biased towards..?

 

[Zimbabwe]

Since when was wikipedia ever trustworthy?