The conversations are amazing
this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2025
913 points (82.1% liked)
Memes
53332 readers
2636 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It really is astounding how much every sinophobes source is inevitably just Wikipedia.
Which in turn its Adrian Zenz ๐
Umm no it isn't sweaty, it clearly says the source is [organisation founded by Adrian zenz] and [organisation that funds Adrian zenz]
More and more I see them just sending either a duckduckgo search, or the first few links from that search, which is of course always from anglo-supremacist news sources.
It's too bad the people of China aren't allowed to edit Wikipedia, and correct the facts, because of their oppressive state.
๐คฃ https://www.vice.com/en/article/the-internet-is-flooded-with-wikipedia-edits-made-by-government-and-big-oil/
They literally dont care since they have a dozen better alrernatives ๐
Are they better, though?
I mean, last I checked, Wikipedia is far more accurate than most encyclopedias professionally assembled. And, to add to it: Wikipedia is certainly well sourced, and admits its biases quite openly, and in fact are working to correct those biases.
So, what Chinese-based wikipedia alternatives are out there? And I mean, communally owned, maintained, and edited encyclopedia, which, quite frankly, is one of the best examples of a communist endeavors one can find on the internet at this time...
Lol, what do you mean "checked"? You're just assuming its accurate based on your pre-existing biases.
I'm assuming it's still as accurate as the data previously showed, and because I'm an active editor there, who works quite hard to ensure what I edit is reliably sourced.
Oh, so you didn't check.
If you have evidence of the contrary, I'd be happy to see it.