Template:Wikipedia: Difference between revisions

The brainchild of American internet entrepreneur [[Jimmy Wales]], among others, and the original 'project' of the subsequent {{tag|Wikimedia Foundation}} (WMF), [[:Category:Wikipedia|Wikipedia's]] stated objective is to have an officially '{{W|Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|neutral point of view}}' ([[:Category:NPOV|NPOV]]).  Sadly, many articles suffer from systemic bias; Wikipedia is often justifiably {{W|Wikipedia:Conflict of interest|accused}} by people on one side of an issue of being biased toward the other side, and vice-versa.  This is true across the political spectrum, as well as for many other issues and [[:Category:Wiki Topic|subjects]] covered.  Wikipedia is the biggest fish in the global [[:Category:All|wiki]] pond, and receives far more traffic, ''and'' [[:Category:Wiki Edit Mode|editing]] activity, than any other [[WhatIsWiki|wiki]].  However, despite Wikipedias' claim to being an 'encyclopedia', many [[:Category:Education|academic]] institutes and other [[:Category:Professions|professional]] organisations recommend that Wikipedia is <u>not</u> used as a primary source of information, due to the fact that many articles are frequently incorrect, and can be routinely adversely biased.  Furthermore, many Wikipedia articles have a seemingly extremely low threshold of '{{W|Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources|reliable source}}' references and {{W|Wikipedia:Citing sources|citations}}.  Indeed, <u>many</u> Wikipedia articles fail their own {{W|Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiability}} criteria, and can remain for many years without any citations, despite highly visible warning banners highlighting the lack of said citations (and threatening to delete said unreferenced articles); this even includes biographical articles for {{W|Category:Living people|living people}}.  Also, the [[English Wikipedia]] allows articles to be 'promoted' to a {{W|Wikipedia:Good articles|good article}} (GA) status; despite failing their own {{W|Wikipedia:Good article criteria|criteria}} on having adequate reliable source citations, editorial conjecture, and even {{W|Wikipedia:No original research|original research}}. [http://Eng.Anarchopedia.org/Criticism_of_Wikipedia]