Wikipedia uses international editors for content curation that they solicit donations for to pay their salaries. Anything Wiki is untrustworthy at best and disinfo at worst. Very few legitimate content stays legit there once the curators get ahold of it. Its more of a regime opinion/Ministery of T***h board now. Even Sarah Palin pointed to their dishonesty when they reinvented Paul Revere for Obama to suit a narrative. That's clearly 1984-esc manipulation and gaslighting. I wouldn't trust a damn thing they post. Something may be accurate at the time of creation but it will change to suit the narrative in time. Curators just need to get to it in their queue list. Let this sink!
Darling Mary wrote:
Wikipedia uses international editors for content curation that they solicit donations for to pay their salaries. Anything Wiki is untrustworthy at best and disinfo at worst. Very few legitimate content stays legit there once the curators get ahold of it. Its more of a regime opinion/Ministery of T***h board now. Even Sarah Palin pointed to their dishonesty when they reinvented Paul Revere for Obama to suit a narrative. That's clearly 1984-esc manipulation and gaslighting. I wouldn't trust a damn thing they post. Something may be accurate at the time of creation but it will change to suit the narrative in time. Curators just need to get to it in their queue list. Let this sink!
Wikipedia uses international editors for content c... (
show quote)
I don't use it for a source unless it is corroborated elsewhere. Sometimes they get it right, just not with politics.
Darling Mary wrote:
Wikipedia uses international editors for content curation that they solicit donations for to pay their salaries. Anything Wiki is untrustworthy at best and disinfo at worst. Very few legitimate content stays legit there once the curators get ahold of it. Its more of a regime opinion/Ministery of T***h board now. Even Sarah Palin pointed to their dishonesty when they reinvented Paul Revere for Obama to suit a narrative. That's clearly 1984-esc manipulation and gaslighting. I wouldn't trust a damn thing they post. Something may be accurate at the time of creation but it will change to suit the narrative in time. Curators just need to get to it in their queue list. Let this sink!
Wikipedia uses international editors for content c... (
show quote)
Wikipedia is a wiki, meaning ANYONE Can Edit nearly any[1] page and improve articles immediately. You do not need to register to do this, and anyone who has edited is known as a Wikipedian or editor. Small edits add up, and every editor can be proud to have made Wikipedia better for all(sarc?). There are two editing interfaces: the new VisualEditor (VE) and classic wikitext editing (wiki markup), which uses the Source Editor.
Darling Mary wrote:
Wikipedia uses international editors for content curation that they solicit donations for to pay their salaries. Anything Wiki is untrustworthy at best and disinfo at worst. Very few legitimate content stays legit there once the curators get ahold of it. Its more of a regime opinion/Ministery of T***h board now. Even Sarah Palin pointed to their dishonesty when they reinvented Paul Revere for Obama to suit a narrative. That's clearly 1984-esc manipulation and gaslighting. I wouldn't trust a damn thing they post. Something may be accurate at the time of creation but it will change to suit the narrative in time. Curators just need to get to it in their queue list. Let this sink!
Wikipedia uses international editors for content c... (
show quote)
Wikipedians are volunteers who contribute to Wikipedia by editing its pages, unlike readers who simply read the articles. Anyone—including you—can become a Wikipedian by boldly making changes when they find something that can be added or improved.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.