Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Research shows that Wikipedia is prone to neutrality violations caused by bias from its editors, including systemic bias. [6] [7] A comprehensive study conducted on ten different versions of Wikipedia revealed that disputes among editors predominantly arise on the subject of politics, encompassing politicians, political parties, political movements, and ideologies.
John Seigenthaler, an American journalist, was the subject of a defamatory Wikipedia hoax article in May 2005. The hoax raised questions about the reliability of Wikipedia and other websites with user-generated content. Since the launch of Wikipedia in 2001, it has faced several controversies. Wikipedia's open-editing model, which allows any user to edit its encyclopedic pages, has led to ...
This is a list of Wikipedia articles deemed controversial because they are constantly re-edited in a circular manner, or are otherwise the focus of edit warring or article sanctions. This page is conceived as a location for articles that regularly become biased and need to be fixed, or articles that were once the subject of an NPOV dispute and ...
Buying Wikipedia doesn't mean you own the content in Wikipedia's articles. Because all text on Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License, content remains under the copyright of the editors that contributed them. Wikipedia's articles may be freely reused anywhere—even for commercial purposes—provided the ...
The purpose of this study is to apply a set of ethical criteria to compare the level of bias of six online databases produced by two major art museums, identifying the most biased and the least biased databases. [...] For most variables the online system database is more balanced and ethical than the API dataset and Wikidata item collection of ...
Sometimes, you will come across a Wikipedia article that seems to have a serious point-of-view problem. It reads as a biased diatribe against the subject of the article. Or perhaps it reads as a biased diatribe in favor of the subject and against critics. Either way, you want it changed.
Wikipedia strives for a neutral point of view, both in terms of the articles that are created and the content, perspectives and sources within those articles. However, the encyclopedia fails in this goal because of systemic bias created by the editing community 's narrow social and cultural demographic.
This page in a nutshell: Stating that "Wikipedia is biased" is incorrect, as Wikipedia merely follows what reliable sources say. Wikipedia is foremost a methodology for information triage. It can be imperfect, and it will always tend to follow the mainstream view, but its editors cannot bias it in the long run.