The problem with this specific conflict is that otherwise “reputable” news agencies are just repeating what their sources are saying because they cannot verify the details of what’s actually going on on the ground in Gaza. So you get shaky cellphone footage of some people getting shot and some humanitarian NGOs will publish that civilians are being murdered. A journalist writes an article about it. The Israeli military then publishes a statement that they killed some Hamas official and his henchmen. Another journalist writes an article about it. Both newspapers are usually credible sources that are accepted on Wikipedia. So what do you do? Who is actually right?
Comment on Wikipedia co-founder joins editing conflict over the Gaza genocide page
tabular@lemmy.world 2 weeks agoIt shouldn’t matter if people agree if they both seek the true. If trustworthy sources have verifiable evidence that points different way then the article can present all possibilities. If one side has more/better evidence then present that as primary.
Hubi@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 2 weeks ago
Thats is how Wikipedia has always operated. Wikipedia articles should be and mostly are entirely made up of information that comes from other sources. They are basically just fancy packaging that combines information from hundreds of sources into a single article thats easier to understand.