WIKIPEDIA – THE FAKE ENCYCLOPEDIA
Mark Dice is an independent media analyst and bestselling author of “Hollywood Propaganda: How TV, Movies, and Music Shape Our Culture.” He has a bachelor’s degree in Communication from California State University and was the first conservative YouTuber to reach 1 million subscribers (in 2017).
Reliability of Wikipedia
The paper found that Wikipedia’s entries had an overall accuracy rate of 80 percent, whereas the other encyclopedias had an accuracy rate of 95 to 96 percent.
The reliability of Wikipedia concerns the validity, verifiability, and veracity of Wikipedia and its user-generated editing model, particularly its English-language edition. It is written and edited by volunteer editors who generate online content with the editorial oversight of other volunteer editors via community-generated policies and guidelines. Wikipedia carries the general disclaimer that it can be “edited by anyone at any time” and maintains an inclusion threshold of “verifiability, not truth.” This editing model is highly concentrated, as 77% of all articles are written by 1% of its editors, a majority of whom are anonymous.[1][2] The reliability of the project has been tested statistically, through comparative review, analysis of the historical patterns, and strengths and weaknesses inherent in its editing process.[3] The online encyclopedia has been criticized for its factual reliability, principally regarding its content, presentation, and editorial processes. Studies and surveys attempting to gauge the reliability of Wikipedia have been mixed, with findings varied and inconsistent.
Select assessments of its reliability have examined how quickly vandalism – content perceived by editors to constitute false or misleading information – is removed. Two years after the project was started, in 2003, an IBM study found that “vandalism is usually repaired extremely quickly—so quickly that most users will never see its effects”.[6][7] The inclusion of false or fabricated content has, at times, lasted for years on Wikipedia due to its volunteer editorship.[8][9] Its editing model facilitates multiple systemic biases: namely, selection bias, inclusion bias, participation bias, and group-think bias. The majority of the encyclopedia is written by male editors, leading to a gender bias in coverage and the make up of the editing community has prompted concerns about racial bias, spin bias, corporate bias, and national bias, among others.[10][11][12] An ideological bias on Wikipedia has been also identified on both conscious and subconscious levels. A series of studies from Harvard Business School in 2012 and 2014 found Wikipedia “significantly more biased” than Encyclopædia Britannica but attributed the finding more to the length of the online encyclopedia as opposed to slanted editing.[13][14]
The prevalence of non-neutral or conflict-of-interest editing and the use of Wikipedia for “revenge editing” has attracted publicity for inserting false, biased, or defamatory content into articles, especially biographies of living people.[15][16] Articles on less technical subjects, such as the social sciences, humanities, and culture, have been known to deal with misinformation cycles, cognitive bias, coverage discrepancies, and editor disputes. The online encyclopedia does not consider itself to be a reliable source and discourages readers from using it in academic or research settings. Researchers, teachers, journalists, and public officials do not regard Wikipedia as a reliable source.[17][18][19] It is seen as a valuable “starting point” for researchers when they pass over content to examine the listed references, citations, and sources. Academics suggest reviewing reliable sources when assessing the quality of articles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia
Mark Dice official video
____________________
new York USA ECO BUSINESS EcoTechN.com
______________
NEW YORK MIDTOWN TRIBUNE NEWS POLITICS
BUSINESS SOCIETY CRIME CULTURE USA