Wikipedia is a better source than most of what you can find on the internet these days. Its articles provide ample sources that you can check if you like. I’d say Wikipedia is one of the best things the current internet has. But if you don’t like it perhaps you would prefer conservapedia.
Incredibly wrong, I had the pleasure of correcting someone else earlier today who posted an excerpt of a wikipedia article regarding financial aid to Palestine as a source, the sole cited source of which was a Times of Israel article which contained no substantiating evidence whatsoever. The only things wikipedia can be trusted to reliably get right are basic scientific articles, anything remotely politically or culturally controversial will be skewed to fit one agenda or another. If the sources for the wiki article are any good then post them directly instead of referring to them secondhand through wikipedia, otherwise you’re just knowingly outsourcing a lie. And lol @ suggesting that any criticism of wikipedia must be from a conservative, swing and a miss kiddo.
Wikipedia is a bastion of imperialist propaganda. Until recently it claimed that Israel fought a defensive war in 1967 and did a “preemptive attack”. Anyone who actually studied its history knows how blatantly wrong those lies are.
Wikipedia is great for science but awful for anything politics related. Especially if it opposes the Western hegemony. The literal CIA propaganda outlet Radio Free Asia is somehow a “credible source” which they frequently cite whenever they need lies about anything opposing the empire.
Wikipedia is a better source than most of what you can find on the internet these days. Its articles provide ample sources that you can check if you like. I’d say Wikipedia is one of the best things the current internet has. But if you don’t like it perhaps you would prefer conservapedia.
Incredibly wrong, I had the pleasure of correcting someone else earlier today who posted an excerpt of a wikipedia article regarding financial aid to Palestine as a source, the sole cited source of which was a Times of Israel article which contained no substantiating evidence whatsoever. The only things wikipedia can be trusted to reliably get right are basic scientific articles, anything remotely politically or culturally controversial will be skewed to fit one agenda or another. If the sources for the wiki article are any good then post them directly instead of referring to them secondhand through wikipedia, otherwise you’re just knowingly outsourcing a lie. And lol @ suggesting that any criticism of wikipedia must be from a conservative, swing and a miss kiddo.
Wikipedia is a bastion of imperialist propaganda. Until recently it claimed that Israel fought a defensive war in 1967 and did a “preemptive attack”. Anyone who actually studied its history knows how blatantly wrong those lies are.
Wikipedia is great for science but awful for anything politics related. Especially if it opposes the Western hegemony. The literal CIA propaganda outlet Radio Free Asia is somehow a “credible source” which they frequently cite whenever they need lies about anything opposing the empire.