Wikipedia was taken over by Deep State disinformation organizations long ago. I use it for chronology or basic bio data (birth, death, positions held) or information about aircraft engines etc. But trolls love wikipedia -it's basically written for them to use to spread disinfo. I recall one time when I discovered 'RevMom' cut and pasted directly from it as if it was her own words.
Wikipedia Blacklists All Conservative Media Outlets, Prevent Any From Being Cited
Hoping to avoid misinformation about President Donald Trump’s nominees and appointments on Wikipedia? Good luck. Wikipedia has designed a protocol that directly and unerringly produces the worst descriptions about conservatives and Republicans by virtually guaranteeing that right-leaning media sources cannot be cited. The once reliable online encyclopedia ran off the rails under the leadership of its previous CEO Katherine Maher, who made sure that not a single right-leaning outlet was deemed “reliable”—a stark contrast to the 84 percent of leftist media Wikipedia deems reliable. A new study by Media Research Center Free Speech America found that Wikipedia, the encyclopedia behemoth,...Musk: Wikipedia - extension of legacy media
Elon Musk @elonmusk: Since legacy media propaganda is considered a “valid” source by Wikipedia, it naturally simply becomes an extension of legacy media propaganda.Jan 21, 2025Here are some examples of wikipedia’s left wing bias that I cited, right before I got permanently banned.
Here are some examples of wikipedia’s left wing bias that I cited, right before I got permanently banned.By Daniel Alman (aka Dan from Squirrel Hill)January 21, 2025https://x.com/DanielAlmanPGH/status/ are some examples of #wikipedia's left wing bias that I cited, right before I got permanently banned.https://t.co/b98lH3K7ir#MediaBias #Censorship pic.twitter.com/15ZDSpWdBx— Daniel Alman from Squirrel Hill (@DanielAlmanPGH) January 22, 2025https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php you possibly ban me, please answer the following questions1) There was talk page consensus to have a single sentence about Van Jones resigning after it was revealed that he was a self described “communist” who blamed the 9-11 attacks on the U.S. government. Why should...Elon Musk urges supporters not to donate to Wikipedia after it spent $50M on DEI: ‘Wokepedia’
Elon Musk urged his supporters not to donate to the nonprofit that runs Wikipedia after the organization budgeted more than $50 million to spend on controversial diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.“Stop donating to Wokepedia until they restore balance to their editing authority,” Musk wrote Tuesday on X, where he has nearly 210 million followers.The Tesla mogul, and key adviser to President-elect Donald Trump, was responding to a post by the right-leaning commentator “Libs of TikTok,” who shared a pie chart that showed 29% of Wikipedia’s $177 million budget for 2023-24 was targeted for “equity” and “safety & inclusion.“ 4...
'Trump bad, Obama good' - Wikipedia's bias REVEALED, and how it affects you
Researchers have uncovered what many Wikipedia users have long feared — that it's slanted against conservatives. A study from the Manhattan Institute, a right-leaning think tank, says it has uncovered 'evidence of political bias embedded in Wikipedia articles.' Donald Trump and other former right-wing presidents are presented in a negative light, the study says, while Barack Obama and other liberal leaders are puffed with positive write-ups.
Wikipedia Co-Founder No Longer Recommends His Online Encyclopedia
Back in 2017, the Daily Beast wrote that Operation Mockingbird “has never been officially discontinued.” Wikipedia - the internet encyclopedia constantly propped up to be the #1 source for online information and constantly shoved down our throats — provides damning evidence that the government infiltration of American news and information is alive and well. Most Google searches rank Wikipedia at the top of the search results page. And YouTube uses it whenever they put one of those annoying “context tabs” on a video. Yet Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source of information by anyone with half a brain. Most..
Of course, say whatever you want about Wikipedia, I'm not disputing their bias.
But in this specific case, I linked to a page which simply compiled all the latest Russia-Ukraine War casualty estimates from several different organizations -- including official Russian propaganda.
So you are free to examine the Wikipedia page chart and choose the numbers which make the most sense to you.
But if you take the time to study them, you'll notice that all of the numbers more-or-less agree except the official Russian propaganda numbers.
The question then becomes, why would you choose to believe Russian propaganda over multiple other sources?
That has nothing to do with Wikipedia and everything to do with your devotion to Russian propaganda.
The Joke is still posting about what a great source LeftyPropagandaPedia is.