I am laughing so hard right now at Wikipedia

More than 2 thirds of the "Citations" are media outlets barely any are political scientists.

Someone please get me some halal bleach.

There is no quality control on wikipedia, editors choose to allow whatever suits their ideology, in regards to politics, it's anything that supports globalism and neoliberalism.

Well, that article isn't exactly wrong, per se. At least not in that screenshot.

>that toolbar
>those tabs
>those bookmarks

Fucking retarded newfag cunt.

>implying the alt-right is a topic of mainstream political science discourse

Maybe after this year it will be, but it's not surprising that most of the available sources are news articles, because it's still rapidly evolving.

>that goose
>those nipples
>those prosthetic limbs

>Goy Citizen
Good good goy buy my spaceships

...

how deep has star citizen burned your pocket?
Myself? 600usd

Fucking nigger

...

>(((wikipedia)))

Here's the thing with wikipedia. Hordes of unemployable sociologists spend hours a day there correcting problematic narratives and writing articles attempting to lend credence to their wacky nonsense. It has actually gone so far now that you need a solid basing is sociology to even comprehend some of their articles, let alone dispute them. This is the way they like it and there is little we can do, except keep putting cultural marxism/creeping fascism articles back up.

how do i print screen OP?

>SSM sources are wore then scientific sources
Kek, how new are you?

>those tabs and bookmarks
Fucking faggot. At least you have good taste in music and vidya.

I seriously hope they run out of money soon.

They've gone completely mad with power at this point.

If you want to laugh, look at the articles on Gamergate and Clock Ahmed.
The Ahmed article has completely superfluous sentences in the summary to make the kid sound like a victim from the get-go. They aren't even trying to hide their bias anymore.

>It has actually gone so far now that you need a solid basing is sociology to even comprehend some of their articles, let alone dispute them.
That's a general problem with Wikipedia.
They got shitloads of articles that only make sense if you already know what they are about.

I got banned the last 2 times I responded to the "or your mother will die" posts.

I can't take the chance with this one, hopefully Kek will count this as an answer.

>How to use Print Screen tab

Why don't you go update the Alt left page on wikipedia.

>this new

...

Christ I witnessed this first hand. There was some article that got completely rewritten by some fucking philosophy undergraduate.

Made my blood boil because the retard instead put in his fucking buzzwords and the whole article lost its meaning with random citations from shit that had nothing to with it except some author saying "wow that is strange" as a quote.

Fucking retarded kids running amok.
I think I should wage a revision war on these cucks

...

That's low.

*tips FBI*

Have you not read the gamer gate shit? They would literally cite the "journalists" who were being accused of giving favorable press to that fat girl they were fucking

fuuuuuuck