Wikipedia

A free encyclopedia that anyone can contribute might seem like a good idea on paper. However, in practice, it is common to find dubious or biased sources used as citations to justify statements and claims which support an editor's agenda. This is made worse by the fact that many search engines have instant answers from Wikipedia and that the average person probably just believes whatever they read and takes it at face value.

Can anything be done to tackle this problem? Is educating people about this issue the only way?

I mean, open source is usually good but when it comes to information it can lead to a lot of misinformation, disinformation, bias, and information warfare.

Attached: wikipedia.jpg (1188x699, 245K)

Other urls found in this thread:

harn.ufl.edu/editathon
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

I remember listening to a talk where the guy mentions that a major encyclopedia asked him to contribute to a specific article. After having his words published in it, he said something along the lines of "If my stupid ass can get in an actual encyclopedia..."

Wikipedia is good for things like hard sciences or things with unobjectionable facts. It's so so with things like history, but you have to contest with the citations included.
In any case Wikipedia is for getting you quick facts, if you want something more in depth you, have to read a book.

>unobjectionable facts
You mean like biology? :|

how about you join the discussion page for whatever article bothers you and offer a source for contrasting claims. At the very least the article might be marked as controversial on the top

I'm a former contributor to Wikipedia who still vandalizes it. I wish there was more competition in the encyclopedia space. Wikipedia reverts out any "non notable" content which makes finding out about less well known topics difficult. But hey they have plenty of articles about minor porn stars but not about distinguished minority scientists.

I've seen entire pages on obscure firearms disappear overnight because OMG THINK OF TEH BABBIES!

Really? I didn't know they do that.

It really comes down to who decides to edit what.

Natural sciences in general

Well, what did you expect if people like your pic related edit the articles?

People can't even agree whether an XX individual is a woman or not.

The problem with wikipedia is that if you for example know everything about clarinets, you'll notice that wikipedia isn't entirely reliable, but if I don't know anything about clarinets then the wikipedia page about clarinets looks perfectly reliable.
And that's a problem with wikipedia as completely factual, what can be considered reliable information depends on what the person is going to accept as reliable information, what is considered the factual source at that time, and many other things.

Imagine someone writing about Germany in 1950 during the height of post-war Germaphobia, west-Germans were often painted as Nazis, while east-Germans were often considered complacent with the authoritarian rule of the USSR.
Now imagine a page about Germany in 2018 when things like social cohesion, a leading role, and financial success are incredibly important topics to Germany. If every German in Germany gets to adjust the wikipedia page, it's going to become partially biased.

That's because intersex conditions exist, and they make biological sex a little bit more complicated than something that can be determined purely by looking at one's chromosomes. It's also worth mentioning this stuff becomes irrelevant when you function in society where reproducing is pretty insignificant.

You know that this isn't what we're talking about.

It is, though. I won't be surprised if research confirming that being trans is a genetic condition that affects brain structures will come out in a couple of years. It's been already confirmed that there are some genes related to being mtf, look around for studies.
Considering how people in developed parts of the world barely reproduce anyway, it's pretty irrelevant whether you're able to reproduce, and medicine might progress to a point where it becomes possible.

Attached: Trapcode!Q7.png (216x233, 13K)

Yeah, I like Wikipedia for searching about products, basic science, but for anything political their (((moderators))) make sure only a certain narrative is followed.

I know you are right but Jow Forums hates smarties

>I won't be surprised if research confirming that being trans is a genetic condition that affects brain structures will come out in a couple of years.


AHAHAHAHAHAHA

Of course it can have underlying genetic causes. The people with that same genetic disorder can also be addicted to surgery or playing with their own shit. Its called a mental illness.

It isn't the same as being queer, which is just a disorder.

Not genes, just too low testosterone, high estrogen levels, boyo

>editor's agenda
100% true. Wikipedia is fine for technical shit described by objective facts. If you go to it for history articles or controversial shit, you're gonna have a bad time.

>The people with that same genetic disorder can also be addicted to surgery or playing with their own shit. Its called a mental illness.
That's pretty much what I'm saying, even if someone claims it's not the case, the distress caused by it is so big that you'll develop mental illnesses anyway. It makes more sense to adjust your body considering it's harmless to the society rather than forcing yourself to pretend things are ok. Doing so is as retarded as saying a schizophrenics that it's all in their heads.
>just too low testosterone, high estrogen levels
Considering my pre-HRT blood tests, I'd disagree
>testosterone: 908.6 ng/dl
>estradiol: 31.55 pg/ml
>progesterone: 0.58 ng/ml

>Considering my pre-HRT
Past and future opinions discarded.

On what basis? What I'm saying is that I don't see why your conjecture has any relation to reality by showing my blood test results as an example.

Some trans who take hormone treatment report even female-like emotional reactions, orgasms and sexual appetite.

Kek this

>It makes more sense to adjust your body considering it's harmless to the society
it's harmful to society considering it legitimizes people disfiguring thier body

And it makes sense considering how many things in your body are affected by your hormone levels. I'd say these effects are about as important as effects on your appearance.
>it's harmful to society considering it legitimizes people disfiguring thier body
People should be able to decide what they do to themselves, and transitioning doesn't harm others. I don't think you'd want to live in a place where your body is seen as a utility to get as much work as possible done.

Honestly the only thing I use wikipedia for is:

>What is "X"?
>Dictionary: "X is Y"
>meh
>Wiki: "X is Y, Y is Z, Z is C, C is..."
>Got it.

>People should be able to decide what they do to themselves
It's not really as simple as that
You see people being peer-pressured into becoming trannies and ruining their lives

People who can't resist peer pressure should die, they're too weak to function in a society.

>Taking hormones that alert brain chemistry and make you emotionally unstable isn't a potential danger to society

wikipedia is such a shit source. it's great for a quick search but you have to keep in mind the type of people who take time out of their days to edit this stuff: 15 year old nerds

I use it for tv shows and music.

>Not genes, just [things affected by genes]
hmm

What you're saying is that at worst you'll cause some drama as your hormone levels are adjusting, and that will happen only if you can't control yourself.

thats not how society works

It isn't, but I don't think it's worth to care about people unfit to function.

All these things can be affected by environment (like food).

The average diet today looks nothing like anything people would eat 100 years ago. It's all onions protein, corn syrup and similar garbage.

... Forgot about the filter for a second there.

SOI BRODEIN :DD

tofu is alot older than that

all of everything can be affected by environment
that doesn't mean genes aren't a factor

How many Westerners do you think even HEARD of tofu prior to the mid 1900's?

i didnt know only westerners counted

Diets in East Asia are a lot more like they were 100 years ago than the diets in Western nations are.

It's a pretty safe bet there isn't a single one of my ancestors who even looked at a basedbean until my grandparents, and none of them would have touched the stuff.

I have to read ingredient lists religiously because of dietary restrictions. You'd be AMAZED at the products that contain onions, often as second or third ingredient. It's used as a cheap filler and to add protein. It also fucks with thyroid function (Go figure: Levothyroxine is one of the most prescribed medications in North America) and is xenoestrogenic.

asians eat onions all the time to no ill effect
there's lots of valid complaints about the industrial american diet but onions isn't one of them

based

It's simple. XX is female and XY is male. XX is not necessarily a woman. Being a woman is leaning very heavily on being feminine. It's also about identification. A male can be extremely feminine but perceive himself still as a man. Gender is on a spectrum, where as sex is entirely biological. But even then sex is a spectrum lmao as some people are born intersex Not everything is black and white. People who think gender is biological still can't explain what the color blue has to do with my penis.

The only reason why we have "debates" over this is because religious people can't think abstractly. Also, our education system is failing in middle schools across the nation and especially in the south...

>Can anything be done to tackle this problem?
Yeah, Turkey banned it because it has 'fake news'.

Gender is a cultural idea, the rules for what define a gender id something we all agree on and it changes over time. Sex is an objecrive biological fact, the basis of which is explained by biology. "intersex" and other perculiarities are outliers and can be understood in the context of biology, especially sexual selection etc. You and others with you are practicing intellectual dishonesty by trying to reject models based on modern evolutionary synthesis. Such attempts will only have temporary success as the truth will always reappear when sound methodology is employed.

Typos are due to my phone, please look past them.

how many genders?
are people of all races having the same average IQ?
are people Tabula rasa by birth?
men vs women?

biology has "facts" that are severely contested by different groups?

btw this is the link that OP should have given: harn.ufl.edu/editathon

>Can anything be done to tackle this problem?
Not really. Go to dictatorship and you get that person's biases. Go to a democratic system and you get nonsense because democratic opinion and truth have nothing to do with each other. Go to a technocracy and you might make an improvement, but you still have to select your technocrats (and it's not like a bunch of experts have never sat around blowing smoke up each other's asses in the past). Go with multiple competing panels and you get turf war instead of objective truth.

>Is educating people about this issue the only way?
That is the only reasonable solution.

>Not really. Go to dictatorship and you get that person's biases. Go to a democratic system and you get nonsense because democratic opinion and truth have nothing to do with each other. Go to a technocracy and you might make an improvement, but you still have to select your technocrats (and it's not like a bunch of experts have never sat around blowing smoke up each other's asses in the past). Go with multiple competing panels and you get turf war instead of objective truth.
well.... you are right. I would say that in a democracy where the people are smart enough and the media is not far left, you may get a good result, but these are only my dreams for a better world.

Yes but people who care are faggots, not biologists.

>Mentally unstable people aren't a higher risk of murder/suicide

quality post

When tax money is used for it it absolutely does.

>muh religion
>gender is a spectrum
>being a woman is about presentation
Ahahahahah go back to /co/

Schools were failing in California not 10 years ago, you probably came out from one.