6 ms·
And this is cherry picking. As studies show the quality varies strongly for historical, politically controversial and highly scientifical topics ( only few wiki
by end_of_line 4y ago
And this is cherry picking. As studies show the quality varies strongly for historical, politically controversial and highly scientifical topics ( only few wikipedia editors ). Link https://dl.acm.org/doi/fullHtml/10.1145/3178876.3186132#BibPLXBIB0024 https://dl.acm.org/doi/fullHtml/10.1145/3178876.3186132#BibP... So nothing "easily disproven"
- throwaway09223 4y agoNo, it's a counter-example which unequivocally disproves your inaccurate generalization. Cherry picking can only occur if I'm generalizing, and I am not. Counter-examples aren't cherry-picking. Your statement "At best you can get some people's opinion about something" has been disproven.
- end_of_line 4y agoMy thesis was "you can't take Wikipedia quality for granted" it fails to be objective on many topics. And your thesis is? Your counter thesis?