I thought wikipedia was supposed to be unbiased and impartial.
I thought wikipedia was supposed to be unbiased and impartial
Ethan Peterson
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Adrian Perez
It is. Get some citations and start editing. Expect hardcore leftist resistance, so you'll need to create an account and become politely active on the discussion page in order to earn the privilege of freely editing without regard to the edit lock, which is inevitable if not already present.
It's an open-platform encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Did you seriously expect cultural marxists, rejectionists, and radicals of all stripes to not try to take advantage of that?
Benjamin Price
/ing this thread with no survivors
Josiah Ramirez
>Falsely alleged Quinn had unethical relationship s with journalists
My sides have vanished
Jaxon Phillips
Yeah, but good luck finding an article from a "reputable journalist" who didn't take this stance. The first pillar of post-fact journalism is "Have a conflict of interest." The second pillar is "Promote a partisan agenda." The third is "Clickbait clickbait clickbait." The fourth is "Find a core demographic for your audience and alienate everyone else." The fifth is "Fuck Flynn and fuck Drumpf."
Kevin Green
This is honestly better than an accurate article, because they don't realize how many red flags it would set off in the minds of sane people.
Dylan Walker
If you need to spend a lot of time to get past the leftists' locks then it's not unbiased anymore.
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
John Thompson
Yeah its bias as fuck but are you doing your bit to fix it?
we need Right Wing Wikipedia Squads.
Landon Taylor
Gamers are the worst humans in the world I'm glad to see Donald Trump is blaming them for school shootings finally!
Ryan King
They use trashy sources when possible. Their article on Lauren Southern uses Vox, Vice, and SPLC as sources to say she's alt right. None of those sources even outright say so.
Hunter Reyes
You don't need to spend a huge amount of time, but you do have to register an account and you need to demonstrate that you're not a partisan hack. The left is just more organized, so they tend to get their first and already have editors and moderators ready to infiltrate.
They generally lose in the end. The only group on the planet with bigger sticks in their ass than cultural marxists are Wikipedia editors. WP:NAP shall not be infringed!
Juan Nelson
Wait, you mean that? Lol
Brandon Flores
I love how the agenda and bias of these self proclaimed journalists was really outted with the treatment of Kingdom Come Deliverance. Nothing at all racist in or about that game, they were just collectively butthurt because he said there were no niggers in Bohemia in the 1400s - and that it's racist to assume that because he's white he's beholden to bastardize his culture to make niggers feel good about themselves in his video game.
Jose Moore
Also,
>Brianna Wu
>Woman
Benjamin Thomas
>I thought wikipedia was supposed to be unbiased and impartial
Since when?
Brayden Martinez
Wikipedia says Al Qaeda attacked us on 9/11
Jackson Johnson
>partisan hack
Unless you're a neocommunist of course, in which case it's alllllllllllllllllllll good
David Cooper
Anyone can do anything on wikipedia. Observe:
Ayden Cox
Nice thinking
Lucas Bennett
No, they get banned regularly. The thing about them is they are sneaky, hypocritical liars by nature. Of course they are going to trick people and then go full Stalin when no one is watching.
Cooper Bennett
>4 years later
>still sperging over zoe quinn
stay beautiful Sup Forums
Carter James
Some cunt changed it back, I forgot leftypol browses here to find their sense of purpose. 80% chance it was a Jew.
Christopher Gonzalez
Jews, Jews Never Change
David Adams
No.