• Mystery_Man
    9·
    3 years ago

    In the world of academia, Wikipedia is wholly rejected as an academic source. However, it can be acknowledged that Wikipedia can be useful to gain some level of “general knowledge” in some topic or another. But anything that has some kind of political discussion is going to be a mess. Just look at the edit history of any page related to communism, the USSR, Stalin, Ukraine, “Holodomor”, etc.

    • AgreeableLandscape☭M
      7·
      3 years ago

      I see one major issue with using Wikipedia as a launchpad for research, as many professors suggest (basically, disregard the article, just use it to find sources). Wikipedia likes to ban sources that are contrary to the Western narrative, particularly State-owned media from socialist countries (and extra topical, Russian State media). Like, they don’t outright ban it, but any edit that cites them has a large chance of being rejected, but basically any Western mainstream media, even blatantly false articles that have been debunked, seems to be just fine according to the mods. I don’t care if you’re a socialist or like socialist media or not (I mean, I am and do respectively), but either way you should definitely have a problem with tbis. Banning such media is deception by omission and that’s no bueno for serious research.

      • Mystery_Man
        6·
        3 years ago

        That’s all true, and very problematic. Though what I meant by my statement was not specifically about political matters. Like if you’re studying chemistry or something there probably isn’t this issue.

    • Breadbeard
      3·
      3 years ago

      solved the issue: from now on refer to the Saudi blockade of Yemen and the US occupation of syrian territory (wheat rich regions) a “Holodomor” and watch them shift goalpost into their own asses