Claims that Wikipedia systematically excludes right-wing viewpoints also ignore how differing viewpoints are handled on the project. When covering controversial topics, Wikipedia editors are expected to describe significant viewpoints in proportion to their prominence in reliable sources — even when those viewpoints are outside the mainstream. For example, Wikipedia's article on climate change includes skeptical positions, but cites them primarily through scientific publications and other reliable coverage rather than through fringe publications or those with poor reputations for fact-checking and scientific rigor. Similarly, articles about electoral fraud claims cite Trump supporters’ perspectives, but through court filings and reliable reporting rather than through sources that have repeatedly published debunked claims. Scratch the surface, and complaints that Wikipedia does not describe these viewpoints at all are often revealed to be complaints that Wikipedia does not adopt these viewpoints as true, or treat widely debunked hypotheses with similar weight as broad scientific consensus.
https://media.hachyderm.io/media_attachments/files/113/761/369/204/823/193/original/e4ebf58523a7e6f6.png
Molly White
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the 