Difference between revisions of "Wikipedia"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "*[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources Perennial Source], Wikipedia, shows extreme bias on the part of Wikipedia. The Daily Mail, the New...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
*[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources Perennial Source], Wikipedia, shows extreme bias on the part of Wikipedia. The Daily Mail, the New York Post, Breitbart News, Epoch Times, etc. are considered unreliable or partisan, but not The New York Times or Washington Post. Scan down the list. In particular, the publications considered or not considered "partisan" show evidence of bias. | *[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources Perennial Source], Wikipedia, shows extreme bias on the part of Wikipedia. The Daily Mail, the New York Post, Breitbart News, Epoch Times, etc. are considered unreliable or partisan, but not The New York Times or Washington Post. Scan down the list. In particular, the publications considered or not considered "partisan" show evidence of bias. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claremont_Institute Claremont Institute] is an example of a wildly biased Wikipedia article, e.g. "According to a November 4, 2021 Vice article,[35] the actions of pro-Trump Claremont Institute leaders—senior fellows John Eastman, Brian Kennedy, Angelo Codevilla, and Michael Anton, as well as Ryan Williams, the institute's president, and Thomas Klingenstein,[36][37] chairman of the board— culminated in the January 6 attack on the Capitol." | ||
| + | |||
| + | *This [https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/07/08/opinion/i-quit-twitter-now-i-browse-edit-wars-wikipedia/ Boston Globe article] is paywalled but is supposed to be good. | ||
Latest revision as of 17:21, 25 September 2022
- Perennial Source, Wikipedia, shows extreme bias on the part of Wikipedia. The Daily Mail, the New York Post, Breitbart News, Epoch Times, etc. are considered unreliable or partisan, but not The New York Times or Washington Post. Scan down the list. In particular, the publications considered or not considered "partisan" show evidence of bias.
- Claremont Institute is an example of a wildly biased Wikipedia article, e.g. "According to a November 4, 2021 Vice article,[35] the actions of pro-Trump Claremont Institute leaders—senior fellows John Eastman, Brian Kennedy, Angelo Codevilla, and Michael Anton, as well as Ryan Williams, the institute's president, and Thomas Klingenstein,[36][37] chairman of the board— culminated in the January 6 attack on the Capitol."
- This Boston Globe article is paywalled but is supposed to be good.
