They also appear to be using Britannica as ground-truth unbias-ness and not heard that Britannica is now online only.
It's like a cartoon parody of reactionary-ism. cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Oliver Keyes <[email protected]> wrote: > "But the most interesting finding, at least for Greenstein, was that > Wikipedia articles with more revision in them had less bias and were > less likely to lean Democratic" > > IOW, articles that are genuinely crowdsourced are more neutral. Good > job, clickbait headline writer. > > On 3 June 2015 at 16:48, Pine W <[email protected]> wrote: >> "Can Wikipedia Be Trusted?" >> http://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/can-wikipedia-be-trusted >> >> "The Unknown Perils of Mining Wikipedia" >> https://blog.lateral.io/2015/06/the-unknown-perils-of-mining-wikipedia/ >> >> Pine >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wiki-research-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l >> > > > > -- > Oliver Keyes > Research Analyst > Wikimedia Foundation > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki-research-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
