• tetris11@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, sad that it just happens to be a fantastic provider of primary sources

    • Bisexual_Cookie [comrade/them, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      It can be, most information on wikipedia is good enough for most things. Political issues are sadly more sensitive to influence or bias, especially on a public (mainly english) encyclopedia like wikipedia.

      The way citations are picked and presented can have bias, the selection of sources used for wikipedia articles can have bias, and the sources themselves can have bias…

      -> Wikipedia is indeed an easy way to find a lot of primary and secondary sources, but that does not mean that these sources are always good or credible.

      In context of the above, using wikipedia as a valid base for your political beliefs is, in my opinion, a bit problematic. (not saying that you do that btw, just that it is)