reliable source

From wired.co.uk/article/wikipedia-fake-news-disinformation:

while other platforms are mired in debate over the borders between free speech, propaganda and trolling, Wikipedia has taken a different route from the onset: community-driven fact checking. One of the platform’s three core policies is verifiability, not truth”, and it requires every claim on Wikipedia be attributed to a reliable source. Any question on the meaning of truth” is deemed moot: either you have a source for your claims, or you don’t. (Wikipedia editors have even debated whether the claim that the sky is blue needs a citation or not.) The resulting debate is much less politicised than the one taking place on social media. Wikipedia’s community standards have created the conditions for a shared reality.

Up next civic responsibility From Roger McNamee’s book Zucked: Waking Up to the Facebook Catastrophe: The internet platforms have harvested fifty years of trust and goodwill the dead What would the dead want from us Watching from their cave? Would they have us forever howling? Would they have us rave Or disfigure ourselves, or be
Latest posts emotions are you comfortable there? being heard discarding tribal allegiance algorithms city roads beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing dance my life away git move slow consent is only meaningful if it’s informed just like you the ordinary people terrible sex the long arc end of a dancer stuck on a sentence the worth of an idea on silence and speaking Dance and whiteness challenge our ways some dancing strong opinions every young person education as a privately consumed good not about intellectual humiliation new eyes a different kind of biography i could have sally potter and the best time to start is now Currency of Play