Wikipedia Blacklists All Conservative Media Outlets, Prevent Any From Being Cited

Life News ^ | February 03, 2025 | Luis Cornelio

[xp38]

Elon needs another takeover.

[BenLurkin]

CBS interviewed Harris. Asked her a question and then spliced in a completely different answer.

Did CBS publish false or fabricated information?

[No name given]

Pronto.

[Red Badger]

Disingenuous if nothing else...................

[BobL]

Seems like an anti-trust investigation may be in order here.

[DesertRhino]

It’s parent company Wikimedia is a 501(c)(3). They need to lose their charitable tax free status if they are overtly political in their activity.
A strong case can be made that they are.

And they don’t have the money to fight the federal government that needs to go after them now.

[BenLurkin]

bttt

[Governor Dinwiddie]

xp38 writes this:

“Elon needs another takeover.”

Yes!

Wikipedia has been hijacked by people who don't have any real job. Every pronoun
has been corrected to reflect political correctness. Look up the article on Dylan
Mulvaney. I refuse to participate in their psychiatric fantasy.

[the_Watchman]

“What’s worse is that Wikipedia is not even hiding it.”

I totally disagree with this statement! The fact that they do not try to hide their bias allows people like this author to cite Wikipedia content to demonstrate the bias.

[Major Matt Mason]

The once reliable online encyclopedia

Wikipedia has never been reliable...well, maybe reliably Leftist.

[OneVike]

Ever since it’s inception Wikipedia has been unreliable, since those allowed to edit were already those on the left.

When I was taking seminary classes back in the late “90”s and early “00”s, my instructors refused to let anyone use Wikipedia as a source for term papers.

I have followed suit in that never will you ever see Wikipedia used as a source link of my information on anything I write that needs backup proof for facts.

[Tymesup]

Wikipedia was easy to find. However, I will avoid them going forward. The fact they are censoring sources is sufficient evidence to conclude their articles are biased.

Republicans buy shoes, too.

[Red Badger]

I just took it off my bookmarks.

Now we can use Britannica.............

https://www.britannica.com/

[Tymesup]

Thx

[The Duke]

"Wikipedia was easy to find. However, I will avoid them going forward. The fact they are censoring sources is sufficient evidence to conclude their articles are biased.

Same here. All they are doing is creating opportunity for a competitor. They'll become just another echo chamber for nutcases.

[Degaston]

The Wrong Inaccurate Knowledge Illusions (WIKIs) in Wikipedia are not reliable.

[military cop]

What’s the alternative to Wikipedia?

[circlecity]

Wiki is ok for getting an overview or quick background on subjects that aren’t remotely political or controversial. But that’s it.

[Governor Dinwiddie]

Back in the day, the Birchers said that the World Book Encyclopedia was OK, but not perfect. The Britianica was considered leftist/communist. Since then we have "online" stuff. I don't know any "one stop shopping" sources for online articles.

I've been thinking of investigating what Yandex has to offer. Wikipedia is OK if you want to look up how they manufacture stainless steel, or what is the resident range of the killdeer plover. Other than those types of articles, I don't trust it.