• @TokenBoomer
      link
      English
      17 months ago

      Someone already showed that the linked article was outdated nonsense almost the minute it was published.

      Where? Everything I’m reading says that most of the new state-level areas are inhabited and not “ghost cities.” Unless Ohio State is wrong.

      • Flying SquidM
        link
        English
        17 months ago

        It’s really not hard to go through a conversation chain.

        https://lemmy.world/comment/10300436

        But I notice you ignored all the stuff about the source being far right, so I’m guessing none of this actually matters to you anyway.

        • @TokenBoomer
          link
          English
          1
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          I care about the facts and the truth, not the source, as should you.

          But I notice you ignored all the left-wing sources I provided that demonstrates the new areas in China are populated and not “ghost cities,” so I’m guessing none of this actually matters to you anyway.

          • Flying SquidM
            link
            English
            27 months ago

            This is what you said which started this conversation:

            I was just reading about it. It’s another web encyclopedia trying to incorporate other encyclopedias to compete against Wikipedia’s biases.

            I showed you that the whole thing is about Wikipedia not having a right-wing bias.

            I thought you cared about facts and truth?

            • @TokenBoomer
              link
              English
              0
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              I do. I admitted Justapedia was a biased source:

              Edit: I read through the [page](https://justapedia.org/wiki/Fascism) on Fascism. It’s crap, runaway.

              but the references linked were credible.

              I’ll admit when I’m wrong, will you?

              Five studies, including two from Harvard researchers, have found a left-wing bias at Wikipedia:

              • A Harvard study found Wikipedia articles are more left-wing than Encyclopedia Britannica.
              • Another paper from the same Harvard researchers found left-wing editors are more active and partisan on the site.
              • 2018 analysis found top-cited news outlets on Wikipedia are mainly left-wing.
              • Another analysis using AllSides Media Bias Ratings™ found that pages on American politicians cite mostly left-wing news outlets.
              • American academics foundconservative editors are 6 times more likely to be sanctioned in Wikipedia policy enforcement. source
              • Flying SquidM
                link
                English
                27 months ago

                When did I say Wikipedia didn’t have a bias? Please quote me.

                Again, if you care about the truth, you’ll show where I made that claim that you think you’re refuting.

                • @TokenBoomer
                  link
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  Maybe I misread it. I’m not concerned with winning an argument, only with correcting the misinformation about “ghost cities.” I did that. Now I just have to wait for Legoland Sichuan to open in 2025 in the new state-level are of Tianfu. Hopefully it won’t be too crowded, since it’s a “ghost city.”

                  • Flying SquidM
                    link
                    English
                    1
                    edit-2
                    7 months ago

                    “Maybe” you misread what?

                    I never claimed Wikipedia had no bias. I never even implied it.

                    You berated me for not caring about facts and truth, then you lied about me, now you won’t even admit it was a lie.