Wikipedia

A vast, one of a kind multi-language, multi-editor encyclopaedia.

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki  
"The free encyclopedia that anyone can edit"
Started: January 15, 2001

 

Sub-Pages

Page Name	Size	Description
"Wikipedia/List of COVID-19 conspiracy theorists"	3,284	The people and groups that Wikipedia consider COVID-19 conspiracy theorists.
Wikipedia/Censorship	9,442	Wikipedia claims not to be censored. However, wikipedia's policies don't back this up. Their notions of 'reliability' and 'notability' are particularly suspect.
Wikipedia/Gaps	1,575	Some of wikipedia's most notable gaps.
Wikipedia/Hasbara	46,459	Systematic gatekeeping for Jewish interest on Wikipedia
Wikipedia/Notability	5,610	Wikipedia's supposedly impartial test used to censor topics, ideas and evidence from Wikipedia, while easy admission of disinformation sourced from commercially-controlled media.
Wikipedia/Problems	23,952	An analysis of Wikipedia's problems, which suggests that its failure to challenge the establishment is rooted in its subservience to organised money-power and is the fatal flaw from which a host of other symptoms arise.
Wikipedia/Protection	1,760	Wikipedia protects sensitive pages, to prevent anonymous edits which are deemed unwanted. Such protection is an indication that a page may be of deep political relevance.
Wikipedia/Reliability	3,434	Wikipedia deems some information sources as "reliable" and some as "unreliable", which provide an easy mechanism for blacklisting anyone who contradicts or questions the concensus trance promoted by commercially-controlled media. This website, by contrast, insists that wherever the source, information should be subject to critical scrutiny.
Wikipedia/Russian edition	3,076	The Russian-language version of Wikipedia - but not written by anyone in Russia!
Wikipedia/System gamers	5,076	Wikipedia accounts accused to manipulate content.

Wikipedia has an impressive 30 million or so articles in around 300 languages. However, once over 50 thousand, the number of active English-language editors Wikipedia has been in decline since 2007, and stood by Summer 2013 at around 30,000.

Official Narrative

Wikipedia bills itself as "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit".

Centralisation

Wikipedia is a website, which means it is centralised.

Hierarchical Control

and while that is true, reverting people's edits is really easy, and so is blocking users or IP addresses. Not everyone can do that. Who decides who can and who can't? Wikipedia editors are kept in line with what has been called "a crushing bureaucracy with an often abrasive atmosphere", one which gives special permissions to a very select group of editors - privileges that can be revoked if someone's decisions are deemed 'out of line' with the Official Narrative. Wikipedia is not as radically unbiased and fair as it purports to be, and increasingly reflects the agendas of those with deep pockets who have invested in shaping it to suit their commercial purposes.

Professionalisation

Wikipedia is not controlled by a grassroots organisation of volunteers. The number of individuals editing it has been in decline for years and nowadays it receives multi-million dollar donations from companies and grant giving foundations such as from the Ford Foundation, Omidyar Network and Google, some of which have been linked to seats on the board of the Wikimedia foundation. The business of paid edits is harder to document, but WikiScanner has shown that media organisations, PR companies, agents of the deep state and CIA are systematically editing pages of personal interest to them.

Censorship

Full article: Wikipedia/Censorship

Wikipedia is subject to censorship, either by swiftly reverting edits which expressed unwanted views (however factually based), or by disallowing edits on certain, particularly sensitive, topics by the page protection system.

Problems

Full article: Wikipedia/Problems

The core problem of Wikipedia is the problem of establishing reliability. In accordance with its increasing professionalization, its decision to depend on "reliable secondary sources such as mainstream media", echoes the pattern of commercially-controlled media the world over. It is therefore inevitable that at least on commercially or politically sensitive topics, Wikipedia tends to display a predictable pattern of symptoms:

Wikipedia's Problems:

Bias

Censorship

Gaps

Spin

Obfuscation

See Also

• WikipediaPlus - A tool to supplement Wikipedia with content from alternative websites such as this
• Wikipediocracy - "We exist to shine the light of scrutiny into the dark crevices of Wikipedia"
• "When a primary source isn't good enough", discussion about Wikipedia's criteria for admissibility