2026-09-15 08:06 UTC
Replies (9)
-
@sushiatnight@lemmy.ml 2026-09-15 08:59
Some good reading about Wikipedia.
-
@freshfusion@discuss.tchncs.de 2026-09-15 09:11
Fascist and colonial states atrocities are widely documented in Wikipedia, countries that we consider capitalist probably too. I recently stumbled across Belgian atrocities in Congo reading Wikipedia by accident. It motivated me to read more about it in the future, maybe “Heart of darkness” (while not exactly historical, it still seems like a good critique. By the way is it a good novel?).
-
@Cysioland@lemmygrad.ml 2026-09-15 09:38
Also it’s doing unionbusting
-
@makeshift0546@lemmy.today 2026-09-15 11:15
I’ll take the ban on this account. Are you retarded?
-
@IpsumLauren@lemmy.world 2026-09-15 10:39
en.wikipedia.org/…/Anti-communist_mass_killings
-
@halvar@lemy.lol 2026-09-15 13:56
That’s probably because most mass killings under capitalist regimes are just generally called “mass killings”. They are your regular, run of the mill mass killings that aren’t really newsworthy and that we are accustomed to.
-
@MrShankles@reddthat.com 2026-09-16 09:48
Idk, I’ve learned a tremendous amount about things outside my culture… because of wikipedia. Don’t let perfection be the enemy of good?
-
@Goodlucksil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2026-09-16 17:39
Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth says: This page in a nutshell: Any material added to Wikipedia must have been published previously by a reliable source. Editors may not add content solely because they believe it is true, nor delete content they believe to be untrue, unless they have verified beforehand with a reliable source. Verifiability is as important as truth. But reliable sources are biased! From WP:BIASED (Wikipedia:Reliable sources#Biased or opinionated sources). Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view. However, reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective. Sometimes non-neutral sources are the best possible sources for supporting information about the different viewpoints held on a subject. (Bolding mine) But reliable sources are chosen by biased contributors! OP attached to their comic repost RSP columns. Deutsche Welle: Reliability was never discussed in an RFC. Anyone complaining here of bias does not acknowledge their possibility (if they are not banned) of making an RFC on it. Voice of America: Discussed on RSN a few times. The last one is pretty interesting: Here Xinhua: Discussed here. ITT: It’s quite old, but Xinhua is very controversial. Telesur: Discussed here around seven years ago. Quite conclusive, I would say.
-
@gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org 2026-09-17 10:07
that’s an interesting way to sum it up, yeah. do you happen to have any collections of articles that discuss mass killings under capitalist states?