this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2024
0 points (50.0% liked)

Fediverse

17724 readers
2 users here now

A community dedicated to fediverse news and discussion.

Fediverse is a portmanteau of "federation" and "universe".

Getting started on Fediverse;

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] triplenadir@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Wikipedia is hilariously biased, especially on any politics or history topics.

here are extensive lists of complaints of bias, from both left- and right- wing alternatives:

https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Wikipedia

https://www.conservapedia.com/Wikipedia

[โ€“] VolcanoWonderpants@lemmy.today 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

...are these people writing about the same website?! ๐Ÿ˜‚

[โ€“] OpenStars@startrek.website -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They baited you by saying "wikipedia", but then they switched to what looks like the wikia software. Notice how they are from lemmygrad? I hope you get my point.

I can get why that user might have a pro-communist bias themself due to being from a pro-communist instance, but the articles they linked seemed to be an accurate enough representation of how the far left and far right see Wikipedia.

Maybe not completely accurate to how it really is in all aspects, but I don't really care enough about Wikipedia's biases to fact check each contradictory claim in each article. I barely use it as a point of reference anymore anyways. (Though I've found it tends to have a liberal bias, like both the articles stated. I seem to remember that during the past election, some sections of the articles about Trump or featuring him in some way used very emotionally charged language)

But accurate or not, I still find it hilarious to look at the articles side by side. One claims the articles are written mainly by teenagers and the unemployed and supports communism, and the other claims they're written mostly by privileged White men who hate communism.