hector@lemmy.today 5 days ago
Paid editors are a scourge on wikipedia. Everyone with an axe to grind hires them. From revisionists trying to rehabilitate feudalism, or any of history’s great monsters it appears, to any monied interests. Whether it’s a polluting industry, and or a company exploiting workers in SE Asia in virtual slave labour, or a government official somewhere, there are dudes on wikipedia that are paid to do these things.
Wikipedia is only a good source on non controversial topics, at least unless you look at the actual sources submitted and can cut through the agendas, something most people can’t seem to do well honestly.
Wikipedia is only a good source on non controversial topics
There’s research showing that controversial topics ultimately get better Wikipedia articles, because they get more attention, and because editors more strongly feel the need to get good quality sources.
Very true, I’ve had whole cited paragraphs removed by non-registered users. Of course, IF you’ve got the time, you can look through the article history pages. For recently embarassed subjects, it’s not hard to spot the deletions over the past month or two.
VonReposti@feddit.dk 5 days ago
You can’t check the source for information that’s entirely been omitted. In any case, never assume Wikipedia provides the full story, or even a condensed and accurate one. What has been mentioned might be correct, but the devil is in what’s been left out.