• Passerby6497@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Kinda burying the lede on that complaint…

    and 321 edits on the ridiculously detailed International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Both of these articles were, at one time, strongly biased in favor of Russia.

    Wikipedia cares more about bias than* ridiculous details, especially when the ridiculous detail is there to put bias into the article

    • JackbyDev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I read it as adding a bunch of superfluous details that were biased.

      • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        What is the difference between including ridiculous amounts of detail to bias the article, and superfluous biased details that still end up with a biased article?

        Seems like a distinction without a difference.

        • JackbyDev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          I didn’t imply those were different, I don’t get your point.