Reminder that nobody should read Wikipedia:
newyorker.com/magazine/2006/07/31/know-it-all
Wikipropaganda On Global Warming
cbsnews.com/news/wikipropaganda-on-global-warming/
"Wikipedia is full of rules that editors are supposed to follow, and it has a code of civility. Those rules and codes don't apply to Connolley, or to those he favors.
"Peisers crap shouldn't be in here," Connolley wrote several weeks ago, in berating a Wikipedian colleague during an "edit war," as they're called. Trumping Wikipedia's stated rules, Connelly used his authority to ensure Wikipedia readers saw only what he wanted them to see. Any reference, anywhere among Wikipedia's 2.5 million English-language pages, that casts doubt on the consequences of climate change will be bent to Connolley's bidding."
A professor of history isn't allowed to correct a page on the topic he's an expert on:
chronicle.com/article/The-Undue-Weight-of-Truth-on/130704/
Wikipedia’s Seven Worst Moments
breitbart.com/tech/2016/07/05/wikipedias-seven-worst-moments/
1. Removing Orlando from the “Islamist Terrorist Attacks” List
2. Attempting to remove references of left-wing activist’s praise for Osama Bin Laden
3. Doxing the editor of Adland and revealing her home address
4. GamerGate, one of the most biased pages on Wikipedia
5. Placing a long-standing editor on trial for “off-site harassment” without presenting any evidence of such to the wider Wikipedian community — or to the editor!
6. The Grant Shapps Debacle
7. Trying To Get A Tech Journalist Fired For Things He Never Said
'The Hunting Ground' crew caught editing Wikipedia to make facts conform to film
washingtonexaminer.com/the-hunting-ground-crew-caught-editing-wikipedia-to-make-facts-conform-to-film/article/2576792#.Vk53g5TgJcs.twitter
>A crew member from "The Hunting Ground," a one-sided film about campus sexual assault, has been editing Wikipedia articles to make facts conform with the inaccurate representations in the film.
The Top 10 Reasons Students Cannot Cite or Rely On Wikipedia
findingdulcinea.com/news/education/2010/march/The-Top-10-Reasons-Students-Cannot-Cite-or-Rely-on-Wikipedia.html
10. You must never fully rely on any one source for important information.
9. You especially can’t rely on something when you don’t even know who wrote it.
8. The contributor with an agenda often prevails.
7. Individuals with agendas sometimes have significant editing authority.
6. Sometimes “vandals” create malicious entries that go uncorrected for months.
5. There is little diversity among editors.
4. The number of active Wikipedia editors has flatlined.
3. It has become harder for casual participants to contribute.
2. Accurate contributors can be silenced.
1. It says so on Wikipedia.
Google & Wikipedia: Best Friends Forever
red*dit.com/r/WikiInAction/comments/32tdzk/google_wikipedia_best_friends_forever/
Colleges offer credit to students who enter ‘feminist thinking’ into Wikipedia
campusreform.org/?ID=5028
Mass Wikipedia Edit To Make The Internet Less Sexist
archive.today/5BTHg
Kansas City Edit-A-Thon Aims To Close Gender Gap On Wikipedia
kcur.org/post/kansas-city-edit-thon-aims-close-gender-gap-wikipedia
A Feminist Edit-a-Thon Seeks to Reshape Wikipedia
archive.is/C7B1I
Wikipedia itself admits it's not reliable for anything:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources
However, although Wikipedia articles are tertiary sources, Wikipedia employs no systematic mechanism for fact checking or accuracy. Thus, Wikipedia articles (and Wikipedia mirrors) are not reliable sources for any purpose. Because Wikipedia forbids original research, there is nothing reliable in it that is not citable with something else.
A Compendium of Wikipedia Criticism
wikipediocracy.com/2015/08/16/a-compendium-of-wikipedia-criticism/