people read Wikipedia and assume google suggested it. popukism talks about googling and check wikipedia instead of Britannica why? sometimes the source of wikipedia is Britannica so just go Britannica directly.
but Britannica doesn't have some topics and wikipedia has them but is it accurate? the problem is FRAUD pretending to be a source of information with edit wars and people HOPING an expert decided but anyone can edit even me not the expert writing with peer review.
even if i can't find a specific error the fact of edit wars proved not an expert writing and the winner of edit wars is whatever private agenda of wikipedia company. do NOT donate nor even trust.
if i or anybody makes a mistake it is possible and still have credibility because POSSIBLE to correct and not a fraud claiming i am flawless but wikipedia is a fraud letting anyone edit as if that will purify it the method is the fraud. so when we see the area of u.s. "source britanica retrieved a certaiin date" ask why? that was the day someone snuck a change into britanica to quote the wrong data before Britannica got fixed!!
the idsue is not sometimes wrong like myself but the problem is the method and the fraud hopingbthat if anybody can edit it will purify the errors and result in correct information that is the fraud pretending to be information after editing.
we must only use peer reviewed stuff to make sure the presentation is accurate.
case in point is area of u.s. less than china? paper books say china less. Britannica said china less but wikipedia BASED ON britanica a certain date... the day they got the alteration in before fixing, has china bigger. we see the bias of this private company to lie in a way that makes u.s. look bad who knows how many other times wikipedia had opportunity forbthat and other bias.
we must stop using wikipedia not only because it has errors but because of the fraud in the methods as above.
No comments:
Post a Comment