I thought this article would have a substantive critique but it doesn’t. Quilette is absolutely not a reliable source. If you’re mad Wikipedia doesn’t trust a magazine that puts a faux intellectual veneer on early 1900’s race science, that’s a you problem, my good bitch, not Wikipedia’s. And the Daily Mail is so unreliable, I don’t trust it for rumors about soccer transfers and which celebrities are frenching in Ibiza. It’s a tabloid, not a reliable source.
For the record, Wikipedia doesn’t have an agenda against right wing sources. There’s plenty on their reliable sources list. They have an agenda against tabloids, quackery, and pseudoscience.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@lemmy.world
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
I thought this article would have a substantive critique but it doesn’t. Quilette is absolutely not a reliable source. If you’re mad Wikipedia doesn’t trust a magazine that puts a faux intellectual veneer on early 1900’s race science, that’s a you problem, my good bitch, not Wikipedia’s. And the Daily Mail is so unreliable, I don’t trust it for rumors about soccer transfers and which celebrities are frenching in Ibiza. It’s a tabloid, not a reliable source.
For the record, Wikipedia doesn’t have an agenda against right wing sources. There’s plenty on their reliable sources list. They have an agenda against tabloids, quackery, and pseudoscience.
So you admit they do have a bias against right-wing sources!