Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In a subsequent study, the same researchers compared about 4,000 Wikipedia articles related to U.S. politics (written by an online community) with the corresponding articles in Encyclopædia Britannica (written by experts) using similar methods as their 2010 study to measure "slant" (Democratic vs. Republican) and to quantify the degree of bias ...
Articles listed here may need more work than usual to approach a neutral point of view. For articles that are currently unbalanced, see NPOV dispute instead. Articles on this list should be checked from time to time to monitor developments in the presentation of the issues. Use the "related changes" link to quickly review changes to these articles.
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 ...
Maps of geotagged Wikipedia articles and geolocated images on Wikimedia Commons show notable gaps in comparison to the density of items in the GeoNames database. Most English-speaking (native or non-native) contributors to Wikipedia are American or European, which can lead to an American or European perspective.
A paper titled "Is Wikipedia Politically Biased?" [1] answers that question with a qualified yes: [...] this report measures the sentiment and emotion with which political terms are used in [English] Wikipedia articles, finding that Wikipedia entries are more likely to attach negative sentiment to terms associated with a right-leaning political orientation than to left-leaning terms.
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.
A Nature paper titled "Online Images Amplify Gender Bias" [1] studies: "gender associations of 3,495 social categories (such as 'nurse' or 'banker') in more than one million images from Google, [English] Wikipedia and Internet Movie Database (IMDb), and in billions of words from these platforms" As summarized by Neuroscience News:
The following politically related articles have been identified as inadequate. They must be completed to counter the systemic bias of Wikipedia. Each article is assigned a level of completedness according to the following scale: (We will have to agree on some sort of scale) - stub, a paragraph or two, completely inadequate.