Paul Cantrell
The most Britannica manages to mention of what was actually in that land is this:
❝Much of the territory turned out to contain rich mineral resources, productive soil, valuable grazing land, forests, and wildlife resources of inestimable value.❞
Not a single mention, AFAICT, of the fact that there were already people there.
4/
Paul Cantrell
I remember being extremely confused about this as a kid when I first heard about the Louisiana Purchase. How could the US “purchase” land that nobody from Europe had even explored? Didn’t the people who live there own it? Huh?!?
Wikipedia, for all its messiness, answered Young Paul’s question. Britannica buried it.
But guess which one teachers are •still• trying to keep out of education.
5/
Paul Cantrell
One muddle-headed way of looking at this is “oooooo Wikipedia is wooooke blah blah.”
The better way of looking at it is that Wikipedia lets people jump in and say “What?! No, you are totally missing something important!” It actually •does• the thing the radical centrists (falsely) claim they want: it opens itself to different perspectives.
6/
Paul Cantrell
As humans, we •all• live our lives with our heads up our butts — including but not limited to the Britannica writers. If we’re lucky, someone will help us see what we’re missing. If we’re wise, we listen. At its best, that’s what Wikipedia can do — and in public, at scale, for everyone.
7/
Paul Cantrell
I remember years ago seeing a study that diligently compared the factual accuracy of Britannica vs Wikipedia for a few select articles (will update this post w/link if I find it).
They found a similar rate of factual errors. The short of it: Wikipedia is chaotic and messy, but Britannica often had missing or out-of-date information. Wikipedia had higher noise, but also a higher correction rate. Factuality came out about a wash.
8/
Paul Cantrell
Wikipedia has •numerous• problems, but it belongs in education.
And right now, per the McSweeney’s OP, it’s a lifeboat of humanity in a sea of slop.
For reference, snapshots of the two articles concerned at the time of this writing:
https://web.archive.org/web/20250923124231/https://www.britannica.com/event/Louisiana-Purchase
https://web.archive.org/web/20250917014942/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_Purchase
/end
skua
"Wikipedia has •numerous• problems, but it belongs in education."
You've presented the great benefits that Wikipedia (type projects) can bring very well.
Do you agree that for something to be suitable for use in education there needs to be reasonable confidence that it is being produced ethically?
Confidence that the workers are being provided adequate conditions, that conditions aren't harming significant numbers of workers?
If yes then please point me at authorative sources.
Paul Cantrell
@skua
You’re being vague. If you have something to say, just say it.
Paul Cantrell
@skua
What is vague is how this is relevant to the thread. You clearly have an axe to grind. State it.
skua
I'm disappointed.
There is nothing "vague" about workers being provided adequate conditions, conditions that don't result in significant harms.
It's your thread so I'll leave.
Paul Cantrell
@smsm1
Just wait until they find out about what goes into (1) the rest of the internet (2) LLMs and (3) school textbooks.
Shaun McDonald
@inthehands I know 2 council areas that block Wikipedia for school pupils as it can be user edited and inaccurate.
Ed
@inthehands There is this sidebar: https://www.britannica.com/question/How-did-the-Louisiana-Purchase-affect-Native-American-peoples
Here is the Web Archive link: https://web.archive.org/web/20250214185216/https://www.britannica.com/question/How-did-the-Louisiana-Purchase-affect-Native-American-peoples
Paul Cantrell
@EdBruce
Wow.
It’s somehow even more damning that they actually wrote this — they’re aware of the problem!! — and not only failed to integrate into the main article text, but AFAICT did not even •link• to it from the main article. It doesn’t even show up if you click “See all related content.”
Paul Cantrell
@courtcan
I am honored!
Court Cantrell won't conform
@inthehands This is going in my current handwritten notebook of collected quotes:
"As humans, we •all• live our lives with our heads up our butts.... If we’re lucky, someone will help us see what we’re missing. If we’re wise, we listen."
--Paul Cantrell,
Mastodon,
30 Oct 2025
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.