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)
Where is NATO's compass?
Intuition alone is all many NATO members would need to make wise decisions, but for some reason they seem to be relying on awful Intel. Whom...
-
The United States was created on the land which it currently exists by European settlers who created a legal document for all its dwellers t...
-
The Louisiana Purchase of 1803 brought into the United States about 828,000 square miles of territory from France, thereby doubling the size...
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