Slashdot Mirror
Wikipedia's Not as Biased as You Might Think, Say Harvard Researchers (qz.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report on Quartz:In a sea of biased content, Wikipedia is one of the few online outlets that strives for neutrality. After 15 years in operation, it's starting to see results. Researchers at Harvard Business School evaluated almost 4,000 articles in Wikipedia's online database against the same entries in Encyclopedia Brittanica to compare their biases. They focused on English-language articles about US politics, especially controversial topics, that appeared in both outlets in 2012. In its initial years, Wikipedia's crowdsourced articles were tinted very blue, slanting more toward Democratic views and displayed greater bias than Britannica. However, with more revisions and more moderators volunteering on the platform, the bias wore away. In fact, the upper quartile of the Wikipedia's sample had enough revisions that there was no longer any difference in slant and bias from its offline counterpart. More surprisingly, the authors found that the 2.8 million registered volunteer editors who were reviewing the articles also became less biased over time.
So they've managed to validate that just 1 out of 4 articles is free of bias. And the other 3?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
"Not properly sourced."
But you provided all the links to sources.
"No original research."
But it's not my own research. Look at the sources I provided.
"Not noteworthy."
What? This is a hugely significant!
Page has been locked, your IP has been banned from editing.
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Please click on Jimmy Wales's ugly face to donate.
I'm not sure how you even go about measuring bias
Wikipedia's NPOV policy is actually a good standard, although sometimes the implementation leaves something to be desired. And trying to follow it was a very good exercise for me earlier in life. It taught me how to speak about multiple points of view respectfully even when I disagreed with others.
Under NPOV you don't report "absolute truth." You report what people believe, why they believe it, etc. It can be very insightful as a tool to understand other viewpoints.
Secession is the right of all sentient beings.