8 Comments
User's avatar
тна Return to thread
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Dec 29, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

No. Do not pay attention to either pop culture or Wikipedia. I expect either or both to change the definition of definition shortly.

Expand full comment
JGP's avatar

wikipedia is a propaganda toilet that flushes backwards.

Expand full comment
Bootsorourke's avatar

Wikipedia is not a good reference for anything

Expand full comment
Outis's avatar

It's tragic, but unsurprising, that Wikipedia was quickly recognized for propaganda value.

I still feel conflicted as I use to regularly donate. I still want to.

However, per your comment, I'd say that the likelihood that something in Wikipedia is accurate is inversely proportional to the subject's currency or socio-political propaganda value.

The real mischief is in subjects where a narrative needs to be projected and protected.

I've read that the editorial process in Wikipedia is highly balkanized and rife with in-fighting.

What is also amazing is that the CIA's "World Fact Book" appears to be a tremendously under-recognized resource, particularly in the U.S.:

https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/

I think it's more than anecdotal to note that, if that site were filled with mis-dis-mal-information (or whatever), we'd hear about it. Given that it's never brought up leads me to suspect it's accurate!

Expand full comment
Bootsorourke's avatar

Thank you for the link!

Expand full comment
Bootsorourke's avatar

One of the reasons IтАЩm really turned off by wokipedia is that IтАЩve found shit that know is untrue

Someone I loveтАЩs copyrighted, very recognizable work, has been claimed by others and Woki makes it very difficult to correct.

Expand full comment
Bootsorourke's avatar

ItтАЩs either accurate or pure Pravda

Expand full comment
ErrorError