User talk:NODALM

Great knowledge knows all is one. Small knowledge breaks one down into the many.

P.S : Misinformation exists on Wikipedia! Because money buys everything ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by NODALM (talk • contribs)

Explanation about the bias of Wikipedia
Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia, once wrote:


 * "Wikipedia’s policies [...] are exactly spot-on and correct. If you can get your work published in respectable scientific journals – that is to say, if you can produce evidence through replicable scientific experiments, then Wikipedia will cover it appropriately.

NODALM: No it is not true, admins decide what's a "respectable scientific journal" and what's a "Scientific research", the terms "respectable" or even "scientific" do not have any exact meaning, they can't be measured with absolute standards, therefore admins will eventually decide what's going to be on articles based upon their personal views. What should be on Wikipedia, are FACTS, 2+2 equals 4, that's a fact, that's not personal opinion, but being "respectable" or "scientific" are eventually decided by personal opinions, and if such information are going to be available on Wikipedia, then the readers should decide if the source is a "respectable scientific journal" or a "scientific research", otherwise Wikipedia is not "free". — Preceding unsigned comment added by NODALM (talk • contribs)




 * Quoted by Tgeorgescu. And it's true, Wikipedia never was a forum for free speech, see WP:NOTFREESPEECH. This is the website of a private US charity which has delegated power to control speech to the Wikipedia Community, and this website generally speaking publishes only what the Wikipedia Community wants to allow as speech. We have WP:RULES for that. Tgeorgescu (talk) 11:54, 3 July 2020 (UTC)