During the trial, Wikimedia did something that it hasn’t done anywhere else in the world. It took down an English article after the Delhi High Court order.
Second nephew versus uncle tussle in Pawar family, with Sharad & Ajit Pawar at loggerheads following latter’s rebellion. Yugendra is son of Ajit’s elder brother Shrinivas.
Fatehabad SP Astha Modi, who is probing allegations, has so far questioned 19 women police personnel whose names match with those mentioned in the letter.
Stalin didn’t ask couples to have 16 children. And it wouldn’t solve the dependency ratio problem. Southern states already have a higher-than-average unemployment rate.
The story of an aircraft that came down in 1981 helps us understand the forces that are acting to restrain both countries, even as their leaders blow the trumpets of wars in public.
As the two-decade-old Dharavi redevelopment project stumbles to take off, it has once again become a key bone of contention between Mahayuti & MVA ahead of Maharashtra's assembly polls.
Disenfranchisement by institutional fiat is profoundly undemocratic. The effect of the ECI's new documentary process in Bihar will tilt the scales in favour of the BJP.
Mini deal will likely see no cut in 10% baseline tariff on Indian exports announced by Trump on 2 April, it is learnt, but additional 26% tariffs are set to be reduced.
India-Russia JV is also racing to deliver 7,000 more AK-203 assault rifles by 15 Aug. These are currently being made with 50% indigenisation and this will surge to 100% by 31 December.
Public, loud, upfront, filled with impropriety and high praise sometimes laced with insults. This is what we call Trumplomacy. But the larger objective is the same: American supremacy.
Not sure which part of ANI being a government’s tool, the court doesn’t agree with. The final proof is the interview Mr. modi did with ANI. Now we know how many so-called-interviews he did during his tenure and their affiliations.
Wikipedia is highly biased. If they want free flow of information then disclose the name of editor for more transparency. Gives all sources of information rather than becoming propaganda outlet
Wikipedia, though a very useful tool to read up on something at a very basic level, is highly biased. One can surf through Wikipedia pages across topics, especially political and socio-cultural ones, to see the bias for themselves.
Nor is it objective, neither is it transparent. One can clearly see a pattern, kind of like an agenda, to push forth certain political viewpoints.
The fact that all contributors and editors hide behind usernames and cannot be identified is used as a tool to spread propaganda favouring certain political ideologies. And this includes fake news.
If Wikipedia wants to come across as objective and transparent, it must voluntarily make public the names (and educational/professional details) of the contributors and editors to an article.
Ms. Apoorva Mandhani is being clever with this article on Wikimedia vs ANI. A case of being too clever by half.
It is common knowledge that Wikipedia contributors and editors are avowedly Left leaning. As such, every single incident or issue is explained from a Left leaning perspective. One can easily spot the bias and favouritism across articles hosted on the platform. A glance through the Wikipedia page on RSS, BJP or even Modi clearly reveals its penchant for engaging in character assassination.
No wonder Ms. Mandhani loves Wikipedia.
Not sure which part of ANI being a government’s tool, the court doesn’t agree with. The final proof is the interview Mr. modi did with ANI. Now we know how many so-called-interviews he did during his tenure and their affiliations.
Wikipedia is highly biased. If they want free flow of information then disclose the name of editor for more transparency. Gives all sources of information rather than becoming propaganda outlet
Wikipedia, though a very useful tool to read up on something at a very basic level, is highly biased. One can surf through Wikipedia pages across topics, especially political and socio-cultural ones, to see the bias for themselves.
Nor is it objective, neither is it transparent. One can clearly see a pattern, kind of like an agenda, to push forth certain political viewpoints.
The fact that all contributors and editors hide behind usernames and cannot be identified is used as a tool to spread propaganda favouring certain political ideologies. And this includes fake news.
If Wikipedia wants to come across as objective and transparent, it must voluntarily make public the names (and educational/professional details) of the contributors and editors to an article.
Ms. Apoorva Mandhani is being clever with this article on Wikimedia vs ANI. A case of being too clever by half.
It is common knowledge that Wikipedia contributors and editors are avowedly Left leaning. As such, every single incident or issue is explained from a Left leaning perspective. One can easily spot the bias and favouritism across articles hosted on the platform. A glance through the Wikipedia page on RSS, BJP or even Modi clearly reveals its penchant for engaging in character assassination.
No wonder Ms. Mandhani loves Wikipedia.