Wikipedia is a source for information; however, I often proceed with caution. A few years ago I started noticing that they labeled some people as being far-right and conspiracy theorist. Often times, those labels can be seen as subjective opinions. As a consequence of that, I began to have doubts with relevance to some information which they provided. Of course, it takes two to Tango, so I label them as being far-left often times.They still have the potential to be a great source for information, regardless.
Followers
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
On Colbert
My advice to Stephen Colbert besides doing a podcast would have been to try and figure out why Gutfeld has been holding on to the number one...
-
I hope everyone is doing well. I wanted to address a topic which I believe is very fitting this year since it is an election year, and due t...
-
Japan is considered one of the healthiest countries in the world. Japan has a high life expectancy. They have less obesity. This is credited...
You're spot on. Wikipedia, I believe, is crowdsourced, so you have to be careful. Would love to see more transparency in the publication process, as I am also inclined to believe that far-leftists are disproportionately contributing to these pages to push their political narratives.
ReplyDeleteAri, thank you for sharing. Sounds like you're spot-on, as well.
ReplyDelete