Comments on: Wikipedia Is an Information Warfare Tool

By: Gkee

Gkee — Sat, 02 Sep 2023 14:20:59 +0000

In reply to jfhdsiu. No…it has not always been useless…that started about 10 years ago. When wikipedia allowed input from all sides and was widely used with citizen checks and balances, it probably was the most accurate source of info available. That’s because knowledgable contributors, not just the academics and power elites, fed the narrative. Now, however, the left-leaning, fake-news biases in Wikipedia are so blatant it’s laughable. It has become as useless as all fake news, lying BS media outlets.

By: Glee

Glee — Sat, 02 Sep 2023 14:13:33 +0000

In the early days of Wikipedia, the elitist and academic mouthpieces railed against the site as not being trustworthy. But it was obvious then that the trouble wasn’t a lack of information integrity but with elitist egos being challenged and power brokers not being able to control the narrative. As more and more credentialed people began to contribute from all sides of an issue, the info became more and more reliable. All sides were represented on controversial issues. I loved the site, believed in its integrity, and almost always contributed to their annual drive….until… at least 8-10 years ago when all that changed.

BUT…The info on the once non-political site started taking an obvious hard-left turn. In areas where I had some expertise, I recognized there was no longer legitimate “other views,” but the claims made were often and clearly agenda driven, blatant propaganda, and even total bullshirt. Either Wikipedia has been bought by the media BS regime or it has hired people so gaslit they don’t know fact from fiction. Whatever their issue, Wikipedia hasn’t gotten a dime from me in years. It is never a site I look at intentionally for information anymore…NEVER!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 02 Sep 2023 13:50:53 +0000

1. Compare Wikipedia’s page on Gamergate to Infogalactic’s
https://infogalactic.com/info/GamerGate

2. The people who censored Gamergate on Wikipedia were working for Russia and Saudi Arabia
https://wikipediasucks.co/forum/viewtopic.php?f=34&t=2930

3. Jimmy Wales’s Creative Commons team is running the “Aspen Commission on Information Disorder” and it is run by Paul Brest who represents Al-Qaeda. He knows exactly who is corrupting Wikipedia and is unwilling or unable to stop it.
https://files.catbox.moe/fs3lfr.png

By: jfhdsiu

jfhdsiu — Sat, 02 Sep 2023 13:22:52 +0000

In reply to Rumplestitlskin. As with the movie "IDIOCRACY" the book, "1984", started out being a prophecy type story but has turned out to be a documentary.

By: Rumplestitlskin

Rumplestitlskin — Sat, 02 Sep 2023 13:04:18 +0000

IN TIMES OF UNIVERSAL DECEIT, TELLING THE TRUTH BECOMES A REVOLUTIONARY ACT ! – 1984

By: Rumplestitlskin

Rumplestitlskin — Sat, 02 Sep 2023 12:57:46 +0000

All it takes is one unvetted lie to totally ruin a business like Wikipedia. Once I heard that certain searches only returned propaganda, we had to assume that NOTHING ON WIKIPEDIA COULD BE TRUSTED, so I stopped donating to it once a year and no longer use it.

By: jfhdsiu

jfhdsiu — Sat, 02 Sep 2023 12:31:36 +0000

I am shocked, shocked I tell you, shocked that anyone has to be told that wikipedia is, has been and always will be totally unreliable as a source of honest knowledge. I always ask everyone who wants to pass on info to me as to ‘where’ they got the info themselves. Whether I believe them or relegate them to the “dummy list” depends on their answer! Citing wikipedia gets them at the ‘top’ of the list and I don’t believe that person anymore on anything. Especially business matters..