Wikipedia – A Tool Of The Ruling Elite

youtube.com/watch?v=nDPrpKDjQ5U


medium.com/@helen.buyniski/wikipedia-rotten-to-the-core-dcc435781c45

Attached: wikipedia.jpg (640x344, 63.44K)

Other urls found in this thread:

everipedia.org/
ecured.cu
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_an_anarchy_or_forum_for_free_speech
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Wales#Political_and_economic_views

We need a leftist wiki, Wikipedia is incredibly biased and selective when it comes to soviet history

We need a new internet.

Attached: consolidated-consumer-internet.jpg (696x172 762.28 KB, 22K)

This is why communists need to support decentralised internet projects in the same way they support free and open source software. Otherwise we risk losing one of the biggest spaces for organising there is.

Shame. It's a good idea but not a good source for the truth.

it's really fucking deppressing how people's only perspective and use of the internet is facebook, youtube, google and maybe twitter and their email. The capitalists once again won in their war on making people consume the same trash all over again without any ounce of criticism or thought. Same shit as movies and even literature.

leftypol.wikia.com

We need a way to decentralise the internet at layer 1. I thought CJDNS had a lot of potential back in the day.

No need to create a whole new wiki when a better alternative to Wikipedia already exists.
everipedia.org/

The Cubans got this: ecured.cu

Wasn't the internet always a tool of the US state?

I mean the first "dissidence" that appeared on the internet was neo-nazism.

Yeah, it's an interesting project. Out of curiosity, what's your opinion of GNUnet?

It's incredibly selective towards leftism in general.

That's why I created pic related.

Attached: HEADER7.png (135x135, 25.44K)

i thought this was /tv/ for a minute and got very confused.

what made me rethink wikipedia's trustworthiness is the radical changes there are between different languages of the same entry. specifically with regard to numbers and statistics, it's absolutely unreliable. maybe the english wiki has greater scrutiny or standards but i would never again trust it with anything other than providing an overview of a subject and further reading

Wikipedia's articles on Marxism are pure old-school Trot bullshit. Reading them you'd swear-to-god Cliff wrote them himself.

bump

Should we try to get this going again? Maybe we should reach out to other leftist communities online (even radlib infested ones).

Yes I am planning on doing so. My plan was to do it all in one go to generate momentum and buzz.

Are you CyberSynGANG by any chance?

I usually trust Wikipedia as an overview of material on everything except specific politics where vested interest might be at play.

Yeah, I just did two articles.

Yeah I saw.

I like your work, so if you ever want to become an administrator let me know.

I created this recently geared towards this imageboard.
The intention being that there is a lot of great content written by posters that would be nice to store for future reference.
For example, there is no good way of storing and cataloging rare good responses to the daily idpol thread made by redditors and Zig Forumstards. It would be better to either point the OP to an article, or to simply copy paste an already good response from the wiki. I fear that bad ideas propagate because good posters are tired of making the same arguments over and over.
It would be nice to catalogue news user's posts. Not sure if it makes sense to include an archive link to the thread.
There's also all the infographs, articles, books, philosophers, etc that posters write about, that would be nice to have an organized place to dump the information to retrieve later.
Again, the intention is not to write content for the wiki itself, but to store good content (and reference to good content) posted on this board.
Happy to make anyone an admin and open to suggestions and criticism.

I don't see too much of an overlap as they both serve totally different purposes.

yeah me too. a lot of articles about venezuela exist only in spanish and the history is a more edited in favor of oil companies on english. Things about elections even change while i'm watching them because dedicated gusanos have power user accounts to talk nice about their friends.

Its interesting to go through the history and see how the page looked years ago or who got thrown out in talk for not doing what jimmy wants.


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_an_anarchy_or_forum_for_free_speech


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Wales#Political_and_economic_views


when I found this out I started checking history for deleted sources

North Korea articles are full of [citation needed] and it doesn't get changed for years.

The most common thing is also sock puppet accounts editing in "conspiracy theorist" for leftist personalities or alternative journalists. If you follow the rate at which they do it is pretty much clear you aren't dealing with a single person.