There are people who think that Wikipedia is neutral

T

ThatDjangoWalk

Zephir
Joined
Dec 28, 2020
Posts
1,776
Reputation
3,259
It is simply not. Wikipedia is a place of clear misinformation, yet, they wear "the neutrality jacket" to deceive the public even more.

The place is full is misinformation and non-neutral positions and sources, for example in regards to certain ideologies, political parties, etc who are against certain movements like feminism or LGBTQ they get to say sometimes if what those anti feminist groups do is good or wrong.

Same with democracy, their starting point is that democracy is great, human rights are objective somehow, and viceversa, it is definetly not a good source of information. Just get deep on any particular subject and you will realize that.

The real questions one should ask are, who is Wikipedia supporting? What is the political objective of Wikipedia? What is their ideology? What is their philosophical stance? If these questions get answered the path will be much clear.

Leaning towards a side is not bad, every human being is subjective and leans towards a side, even the referee. What is a completely different story is when they do such while at the same time they wear the "Neutrality uniform", and Wikipedia not only wears it but they show it off.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Lmao, lutte, AlwaysHaveQuestions and 16 others
oh yeah Wikipedia is just nonsense
 
  • +1
Reactions: ThatDjangoWalk
Fake news mainstream horse shit
 
  • WTF
Reactions: GripMaxxing
The real questions one should ask are, who is Wikipedia supporting? What is the political objective of Wikipedia? What is their ideology? What is their philosophical stance?
There's a huge image here of wikipedians, lots of interesting faces there, that should tell you everything about them:
Clipboard01
Clipboard02
 
  • JFL
Reactions: ShowerMaxxing and Deleted member 6723
The old "incel" page on there made that abundantly clear. Since then, it's been slightly improved back to its original state.
 
  • +1
Reactions: ChristianChad
Girl on the left will breed slayer sons though. :love:
Most of the girls there are pretty ugly, nerdy, or ethnic, some look like lesbians with short hair or dyed in crazy colors.
 
So what do you trust or use for research? Britannica?
 
Most of the girls there are pretty ugly, nerdy, or ethnic, some look like lesbians with short hair or dyed in crazy colors.

The one on the left legit looks like a female slayer tho wtf is she doing there
 
  • +1
Reactions: RODEBLUR
So what do you trust or use for research? Britannica?
Don't trust anyone for research, there is no such thing as a monolith neutral place.

The best is always to go as close as you can to the pure original content and source.
 
Don't trust anyone for research, there is no such thing as a monolith neutral place.

The best is always to go as close as you can to the pure original content and source.
Wikipedia is very biased against Israel sadly and Zionism
 
They don't even try to hide it thou
1624661844727
 
  • +1
Reactions: ChristianChad
Cuckapedia says black pride good, white pride bad
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 2632
It is simply not. Wikipedia is a place of clear misinformation, yet, they wear "the neutrality jacket" to deceive the public even more.
muh "i need sources"

also blacklists sources

:soy::soy::soy::soy:
 

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top