Review Time
Haven't had any problems with the more popular articles, more obscure ones like random roads or buildings are easier to spread misinformation on but overall a great service. Edits usually stay up if you follow the rules and provide explanations and sources.
Tendentious north americanist and atlanticist lies about everything, everyone knows this eternally. Lies about everything in general, it's hard to see an article in which there are not a lot of lies, regardless of the topic. Some of these articles touch on the ridiculousness, including scientific ones, they are out of the real world and they are tendentious "pre-packaged" lies, just to make people laugh.
I have made donations to Wikipedia, but no more. It appears that certain pages are being 'edited' towards 'one' groups opinion which to me is biased. Even going as far as disrespectfully removing professional qualifications. The choice of wording being used by this group of editors within certain pages leaves a lot to be desired. It's plain nasty and mocking in some cases. That is not professional and is not something I expect to see in an online encyclopedia. Incredibly disappointed.
Wikipedia is clearly a useful source of information and opinions, but it is badly let down by the lack of transparency of its editorial process, which allows the website editors (aka 'the Community') to use anonymous identities. Because of this, it is possible to spend a lot of time and effort adding factual content to an article, within one's area of expertise, only to find that the self-appointed editor of the article, whose identity is never publicly disclosed, vetos the additions by deleting or hiding them, in order to preserve a sense of proprietorship. In essence, the process favours the select few who are able and willing to devote substantial time to their editorial policing role. In this sense, Wikipedia is closer to political activism than scholarship. Furthermore, the claim that all content is subject to strict editorial oversight is clearly false - the volume of information on Wikipedia is simply too large for this to happen. The reality is that all kinds of rubbish is published, while elsewhere diligent efforts to add useful information are rejected without right of appeal. I have donated in the past, but will not do so again until transparency standards improve.
Encyclopedias are supposed to aim to be factual, neutral and unbiased in their accounting. Wikipedia is openly political.E.g. 1: "Kill The Boer" is referred to as an "anti-apartheid song". "White Lives Matter" is referred to as a "neo-Nazi slogan".E.g. 2: renowned, published scientists are referred to as "climate change deniers", which is defined as "pseudoscientific dismissal [of] scientific consensus on climate change". This is 100% defamatory opinion. Science is not done by consensus.
The admins on Wikipedia are so bad they make Reddit mods look reasonable. I was researching someone when I came across their wiki page and saw that there was A LOT of incorrect information (no surprise considering that's what the platform is known for) so I was going to submit an edit with sources when I found out that I was blocked by the 'lovely' Drmies. Keep in mind not once in my entire life have I ever edited or even tried to edit a wiki page, never had an account, never interacted with anyone on there, before today didn't even know this admin existed (imagine a complete stranger you've never met or talked to let alone even knew existed wasting so much of their own time thinking about and hating you a complete stranger so much to the point that they're blocking you into oblivion... i'm flattered haha), wasn't notified when I was blocked, wasn't given a reason for why I was blocked, wasn't given an option to fight the block so I can submit the edit, can't reach out to the admin or anyone else period on there, and other then reading wiki pages I can't do anything now. To be honest I don't even care about being blocked but what I do care about is false information being pushed and allowed to run rampant, the fact that wiki and it's admins try to act all holier then thou "We BlOcK pEoPlE tO kEeP tHiS sItEs InTeGrItY" while they themselves do everything in their power to make sure the site doesn't have integrity (pushing false information, obsessively controlling pages, not letting people submit edits, trying to change history, randomly blocking people for no rhyme or reason, etc), and the topping on the poop cake lies saying they're broke constantly begging users for money when in reality they're rich (i've even heard of people who gave them money being randomly blocked). Just wild to me how all of these years later Wikipedia is still had and hasn't fixed it's issues.
Claim your business profile now and gain access to all features and respond to customer reviews.
Wikipedia is a free, web-based, collaborative, and multilingual encyclopedia. It is the largest and most popular general reference work on the internet, consisting of freely editable content by a community of volunteers. Operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit organization, it aims to provide a summary of all human knowledge to everyone, globally.
