BeepAt 25, Wikipedia faces a double threat: the rise of AI and the decline of local media— Human visitors declined in 2025, while AI crawlers are on the rise
brucethemoose“Dismissing Wikipedia” is my political litmus test.
To be clear, it’s never been a reliable source; we learned that in middle school. You take everything written on it with a grain of salt.
…But it’s still an oasis in a desert.
When some of my family started questioning its utility because of its “liberal bias,” like post-grad-educated family saying this as Fox News blares in the background, I knew things had gotten bad.
I haven’t seen any extreme left question it IRL, but I’m afraid that’s coming too, with how tankies a some terminally online bits of Reddit are skeptical of it.
RobotToasterI used to be an editor on there so have a lot of mixed feelings about it, there’s a lot of bullshit that goes on.
It’s good for hard sciences, but most articles on “soft” subjects like history do have a pro western liberal capitalist bias. Although the amount of bias usually depends on what senior editor decided he owns the article, despite “owning” articles being against the Wikipedia rules.
i wouldnt say good on non-phyiscs stem, often times its outdated and never fixed for years.