I have brought NPOV back to several pages that clearly had been polished up by marketing firms. Thankless work, but always rewarding to destroy some astroturfing company’s work
It wildly depends on the articles/topic, but yes, it’s generally not trustworthy. Especially anything politics or corporate, but sometimes articles on objective topics can have issues.
Said someone who’s never tried to edit an article. They watch that shit like a hawk and require sources for everything, if not they’ll revert your changes.
@dessalines weird to see their Wikipedia page reads like an ad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AU10TIX
Good excuse to get editing :)
I have brought NPOV back to several pages that clearly had been polished up by marketing firms. Thankless work, but always rewarding to destroy some astroturfing company’s work
Where is your NPOV now NATOpedia?
Even on Lemmy people think Wikipedia isn’t shit.
It can’t be trusted.
It wildly depends on the articles/topic, but yes, it’s generally not trustworthy. Especially anything politics or corporate, but sometimes articles on objective topics can have issues.
Said someone who’s never tried to edit an article. They watch that shit like a hawk and require sources for everything, if not they’ll revert your changes.
That’s garbage.
There have been plenty instances where articles were manipulated.