All Wikipedia does is push mainstream political correct woke narratives on everything, not the real truth.

Question

All wiki does is push mainstream political correct woke narratives on everything, not the real truth. I am not saying Grokipedia will be any better, but it wont take much to beat wiki.

Answer 1

Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia which can be publicly accessed to create pages about certain topics and add information. But it still provides accurate information for research. "Wikipedia has tens of thousands of editors, from issue experts to the casual fans, who can expand, delete, or change information at will." What Is Wikipedia? Here's What You Should Know

Wikipedia does not push any narratives, agendas, or biases. There are many guidelines and editors as stated that make sure all information is accurate true, and unbiased. Wikipedia:Neutral point of view - Wikipedia The organization themselves state that they have a neutral point of view. 

Answer 2

The claim that Wikipedia produces “woke and biased narratives” is biased in itself; however it is true that Wikipedia is an untrustworthy source of accurate information. This is because, in spite of its widespread use, anyone can readily update it with an account, allowing bias and deception to circulate. Credible universities such as Cornell and Harvard infiltrated their ideas on the unreliability of Wikipedia because of how first-level thinking it truly is; it is not a credible reference material for anything academic because of the easy access to edit concepts on the free platform. Wikipedia currently lacks a rigorous verification procedure prior to content being published, despite having volunteer individuals edit to assure “correctness,” which ultimately verifies how misinformation will persist because of the countless amount of data being updated. Particularly when discussing political or controversial content, selective citation and biased members can result in inaccurate narratives that favor the perspective of any political affiliation, not just popular or mainstream viewpoints. Paperpile adds that “it is not safe to assume that the facts presented there have been checked before publishing them,” which reiterates just how unreliable Wikipedia truly is for any and all information. 

https://blogs.cornell.edu/info2040/2021/11/04/wikipedia-an-unreliable-source/

https://usingsources.fas.harvard.edu/what%E2%80%99s-wrong-wikipedia

https://paperpile.com/g/wikipedia-credible-source/#:~:text=Wikipedia%20is%20not%20a%20credible,been%20checked%20before%20publishing%20them.

Answer 3

Wikipedia claims to hold a “neutral point of view” (NPOV) policy, put in place to ensure that articles published on the site remain unbiased.[1] However, the Manhattan Institute performed a study showing that this policy hasn’t been properly executed. Negative emotions (such as anger and disgust) are attributed to right-leaning public figures, while positive emotions are attributed to left-leaning ones.[2]

Due to the divisive nature of politics, it’s natural to believe that one’s own political opinion is “true”, so Wikipedia may be publishing “truth” despite its political bias. However, the editor’s personal political feelings have no place on a website that intends to inform readers. Your claim holds some strength, but it is worded vaguely and in an inflammatory manner, making it difficult to give a more specific answer. 

Sources:

[1]  https://www.city-journal.org/article/wikipedias-neutrality-myth-or-reality

[2] https://manhattan.institute/article/is-wikipedia-politically-biased 

Answer 4

Wikipedia is an unbiased information hub, while bias's can be present due to the nature of the website being able to be edited by anyone. Many editors and staff of Wikipedia correct that. As stated on their main page "The goal of a Wikipedia article is to present a neutrally written summary of existing mainstream knowledge in a fair and accurate manner" They have a neutral point of view which states the information and no skew on it. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Purpose

Answer 5

While Wikipedia is a collection of information readily available it is not always academcially reliable. The team of editors work hard to weed out misinformation and include sources in all information. However there are tools and means for any person to add in details and information they feel is pertinent. I believe this to be evidence against its scholarly validatity, however whether or not it is biased is a different question. When asked Wikipedia said, "The English Wikipedia has an internal policy which states that articles must be written from a neutral point of view, which has the goal of representing fairly, proportionately, and without bias, the significant points of view that have been verifiably published by reliable sources on a topic" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_bias_on_Wikipedia) they go on to mention that although this is a rule there is room for human error so there are large teams of many people from different backgrounds and of political views all editing together. This collaboration allows for a nearly unbiased look at history and facts as told.