▲ 1073 ▼ They use to tell us we couldnt trust Wikipedia. Now we know. Wikipedia is the only website you can trust. (lemmy.world) submitted 2 years ago by Daft_ish@lemmy.world to c/showerthoughts@lemmy.world 330 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Magpij@feddit.ch 46 points 2 years ago (1 child) The Tab "Talk" gives you a lot more to learn on some pages, take a look ! permalink fedilink source hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 43 points 2 years ago (3 children) Yet if you ever try to edit a page, the "Talk" tab is filled with the most pretentious protectionist people. You can add helpful context or missing information with sources to the wiki, and it will get deleted simply because you haven't spent months cozying up to the greaseball who sits on that specific wiki entry as if they possess it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 2 years ago (1 child) there is a bureaucratic machine for dealing with this kind of problem permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ThrowawayPermanente@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) But what do we do if every level of that machine is completely controlled by those people? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 years ago (1 child) it's not. there are boards on Wikipedia specifically for calling in neutral editors. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago Yep, generally different editors focus on different subjects. permalink fedilink source parent [–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) Tbf the gamergate saga basically caused the infrastructure to have a rolling panic attack over how that such a large movement to insert misinformation against any effort to correct it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hightrix@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago All articles referencing this topic on Wikipedia are extremely biased. permalink fedilink source parent [+] Comment105@lemm.ee -7 points 2 years ago (1 child) Just call then out on it in talk by mentioning why you would add it. Alternatively make an upgraded English-only wiki alternative with way larger article max sizes so we can finally evolve it past 2005. And start using YouTube links and not (just) a native video player. And start quoting/including entire chapters from relevant books. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Someology@lemmy.world 22 points 2 years ago (1 child) The problem with using YT videos is that they are transitory. Also, you're then subjecting your reader to somebody else's advertisements for their gain. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago Also YT follows the same rules as Wikipedia for being a source. You don't cite it, you find what it's citing and cite that if you decide what those sources have to say are relevant to your intended argument. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 43 points 2 years ago (3 children) Yet if you ever try to edit a page, the "Talk" tab is filled with the most pretentious protectionist people. You can add helpful context or missing information with sources to the wiki, and it will get deleted simply because you haven't spent months cozying up to the greaseball who sits on that specific wiki entry as if they possess it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 2 years ago (1 child) there is a bureaucratic machine for dealing with this kind of problem permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ThrowawayPermanente@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) But what do we do if every level of that machine is completely controlled by those people? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 years ago (1 child) it's not. there are boards on Wikipedia specifically for calling in neutral editors. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago Yep, generally different editors focus on different subjects. permalink fedilink source parent [–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) Tbf the gamergate saga basically caused the infrastructure to have a rolling panic attack over how that such a large movement to insert misinformation against any effort to correct it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hightrix@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago All articles referencing this topic on Wikipedia are extremely biased. permalink fedilink source parent [+] Comment105@lemm.ee -7 points 2 years ago (1 child) Just call then out on it in talk by mentioning why you would add it. Alternatively make an upgraded English-only wiki alternative with way larger article max sizes so we can finally evolve it past 2005. And start using YouTube links and not (just) a native video player. And start quoting/including entire chapters from relevant books. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Someology@lemmy.world 22 points 2 years ago (1 child) The problem with using YT videos is that they are transitory. Also, you're then subjecting your reader to somebody else's advertisements for their gain. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago Also YT follows the same rules as Wikipedia for being a source. You don't cite it, you find what it's citing and cite that if you decide what those sources have to say are relevant to your intended argument. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 2 years ago (1 child) there is a bureaucratic machine for dealing with this kind of problem permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ThrowawayPermanente@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) But what do we do if every level of that machine is completely controlled by those people? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 years ago (1 child) it's not. there are boards on Wikipedia specifically for calling in neutral editors. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago Yep, generally different editors focus on different subjects. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ThrowawayPermanente@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) But what do we do if every level of that machine is completely controlled by those people? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 years ago (1 child) it's not. there are boards on Wikipedia specifically for calling in neutral editors. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago Yep, generally different editors focus on different subjects. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 years ago (1 child) it's not. there are boards on Wikipedia specifically for calling in neutral editors. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago Yep, generally different editors focus on different subjects. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago Yep, generally different editors focus on different subjects. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) Tbf the gamergate saga basically caused the infrastructure to have a rolling panic attack over how that such a large movement to insert misinformation against any effort to correct it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hightrix@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago All articles referencing this topic on Wikipedia are extremely biased. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hightrix@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago All articles referencing this topic on Wikipedia are extremely biased. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Comment105@lemm.ee -7 points 2 years ago (1 child) Just call then out on it in talk by mentioning why you would add it. Alternatively make an upgraded English-only wiki alternative with way larger article max sizes so we can finally evolve it past 2005. And start using YouTube links and not (just) a native video player. And start quoting/including entire chapters from relevant books. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Someology@lemmy.world 22 points 2 years ago (1 child) The problem with using YT videos is that they are transitory. Also, you're then subjecting your reader to somebody else's advertisements for their gain. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago Also YT follows the same rules as Wikipedia for being a source. You don't cite it, you find what it's citing and cite that if you decide what those sources have to say are relevant to your intended argument. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Someology@lemmy.world 22 points 2 years ago (1 child) The problem with using YT videos is that they are transitory. Also, you're then subjecting your reader to somebody else's advertisements for their gain. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago Also YT follows the same rules as Wikipedia for being a source. You don't cite it, you find what it's citing and cite that if you decide what those sources have to say are relevant to your intended argument. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago Also YT follows the same rules as Wikipedia for being a source. You don't cite it, you find what it's citing and cite that if you decide what those sources have to say are relevant to your intended argument. permalink fedilink source parent