←back to thread

Tim Bray on Grokipedia

(www.tbray.org)
175 points Bogdanp | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.392s | source
Show context
mlmonkey[dead post] ◴[] No.45777286[source]
[flagged]
exe34 ◴[] No.45777332[source]
Could you share some of the references you tried to use here? It might be interesting to see the quality that they refused to accept towards overturning their narrative.
replies(1): >>45777435 #
ares623 ◴[] No.45777435[source]
OP has a chance to be vindicated. Surely they will take it?
replies(1): >>45777569 #
mlmonkey ◴[] No.45777569[source]
Since you insisted. This is from a couple of years ago, and I have moved on to never donating to Wikipedia again, so take it FWIW.

I pointed out that India had reduced extreme poverty from ~16% in 2013 to ~2% in 2022. This is directly from a World Bank report: https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/0997221042225345... One would think this would be reliable? One would be wrong since this is deemed to be "pro Modi". Another was the success of India's mission to bring piped water to every household in India (a luxury we take for granted in the West). There's a live dashboard maintained by the Water Ministry of India: https://ejalshakti.gov.in/jjmreport/JJMIndia.aspx Apparently it's a biased source. :shrug:

Other examples include the fact that Indian government paid for millions of households to construct toilets over the last 10 years. Or that millions of houses were constructed in villages, fully paid for by the government, during the same period. Or that the government also paid for rural folks to switch to gas-burning stoves instead of wood-, coal- or cowdung- burdning stoves. I'm too lazy to look up the references now, but you can find them with easy searching.

Surely you can't deny that Wikipedia is biased against the so-called "right" side of the political spectrum, and biased towards the "left"?

replies(2): >>45777720 #>>45783323 #
1. wtfwhateven ◴[] No.45783323[source]
>Surely you can't deny that Wikipedia is biased against the so-called "right" side of the political spectrum, and biased towards the "left"?

You don't even name the article you were apparently having problems with. Not sure why anyone should just take the word of someone who is actively hiding the full story when it should be trivial to just link to.

It is obvious your story is either missing huge portions or you're just lying.