Wi***edia: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
Confederazi (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary Tag: visualeditor |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Stub}} | {{Stub}} | ||
Allegedly neutral Wikipedia has a strong leftist bias and censorship regarding subjects like the riots, including regarding the role of Antifa. Furthermore, the Wikimedia Foundation dropped any pretense of a "Neutral Point of View" and declared itself to be an activist propaganda organization. It stated that "Today, and every day, the Wikimedia Foundation stands in support of racial justice and with the movement for Black Lives. On these issues, there is no neutral stance." | Allegedly neutral Wikipedia has a strong leftist bias and censorship regarding subjects like the riots, including regarding the role of Antifa. Furthermore, the Wikimedia Foundation dropped any pretense of a "Neutral Point of View" and declared itself to be an activist propaganda organization. It stated that "Today, and every day, the Wikimedia Foundation stands in support of racial justice and with the movement for Black Lives. On these issues, there is no neutral stance." | ||
Wikipedia Lies, it's owned by kikes to make certain groups sound good and others bad. Regardless of its false narrative, it's not a good source to trust or rely on it ain't recommended. | |||
On one article being mentioned on [[Metapedia]] | |||
Revision as of 16:03, 27 October 2022
Allegedly neutral Wikipedia has a strong leftist bias and censorship regarding subjects like the riots, including regarding the role of Antifa. Furthermore, the Wikimedia Foundation dropped any pretense of a "Neutral Point of View" and declared itself to be an activist propaganda organization. It stated that "Today, and every day, the Wikimedia Foundation stands in support of racial justice and with the movement for Black Lives. On these issues, there is no neutral stance."
Wikipedia Lies, it's owned by kikes to make certain groups sound good and others bad. Regardless of its false narrative, it's not a good source to trust or rely on it ain't recommended.
On one article being mentioned on Metapedia