You totally misunderstood the comment.

We're investigating private companies for bias now? Are Truth Social and Fox News next??

Reality has a known liberal bias.

I'm not writing a paper or essay.. so my standards are different.

It actually shouldn’t matter in this case. Wikipedia isn’t a “source” of anything, it simply states facts and backs them with sources (though not always, many articles will have a “missing source” for many paragraphs). It’s also public, so anyone can add things without it being peer reviewed.

So if you actually care about whether some information is correct, you should check what is the source. And if something is wrong you can do your part and change the text to be more neutral or better phrased. Edits that improve pages are almost always gonna stick.

In the end it’s all ant’s work to update/fix the huge number of badly written stuff in there.

Fuck right off you POS Trumper

Fucking worthless lying Trumper

No they aren't. House republicans can't read. They will just say it's biased and try to force it further right from wherever it currently is without checking.

Bait used to be believable

It's true that it is not generally accepted for writing a paper or essay, but that does not mean that the information is completely unreliable. While I'm sure that Wikipedia is not perfect with regards to truth, it is more accessible, democratized and readable than many primary sources or peer reviewed articles. Those properties have a lot of value by themselves. Would you not agree?

I mean it is comparative to someone saying everything on lemmy is correct because people believe it true. Wiki is a open source so anyone can add to it. Anyone with. Strong opinion or faulty information. Basically just a collection of open source info without regulations.

But the sources are listed below on Wikipedia, not in lemmy.

True Lemmy will not let you post anything from certain news sources. Wiki people can cite anything so Lemmy is more limiting to narrow its users information.

No way you made it out of college

What law does that break?

Edit: Hey downvoter. If you aren't stalking why don't you include a comment on how you think having a bias is in anyway illegal.

Even if it was biased: so fucking what? Freedom of speech means they can do jack shit about that anyway.

Right and we also use lemmy, but we still weigh and judge what we read here or at least we should. And we should do the same for Wikipedia, even though I would argue that Wikipedia has higher epistemic standards than Lemmy. The point being, the openness of these platforms is a quality on its own. Wikipedia isn't perfect, but it is far from terrible.

Yep, graduated!

Nothing stopped someone writing a bogus paper claiming an MMR vaccine causes autism. It being a paper likely gave it undue credit to people who were convinced by it, not that they read it..

Back in they day when being a Republican meant more than obstructionism and authoritarianism.

Yup, they need to just drop dead