I hope that Wikipedia's culture someday acknowledges that money is not the only corrupting influence in a society.
Some of the most egregious examples of biased editing I've seen on Wikipedia were almost certainly not paid for; they were the result of deeply held personal beliefs about politics and religion.
Inaccurate or blatantly false edits of this type are easy to get into Wikipedia articles because politics and religion have thousands of highly biased third party "news" sources, so almost any ridiculous claim can be supported with a citation.
Some of the most egregious examples of biased editing I've seen on Wikipedia were almost certainly not paid for; they were the result of deeply held personal beliefs about politics and religion.
Inaccurate or blatantly false edits of this type are easy to get into Wikipedia articles because politics and religion have thousands of highly biased third party "news" sources, so almost any ridiculous claim can be supported with a citation.
reply